I don’t like what my gut is telling me. The constant assault by UN driven policy in the United States. With all of the executive orders being signed, not just the ones signed by President Obama since taking office, but going back many years as detailed in a column I wrote several months back, something is going on. A closer look at the coming assault later this year on our guns makes everything make a little more sense. It’s all here. I am not telling you what to think, but I am giving you a heads up – they ARE coming for your guns. What I lay out here is just the tip of the iceberg. If you follow these leads given you here, you will see a virtual mountain of evidence. Please sign the petition against US participation in the UN Small Arms Treaty. The EO’s involving martial law are linked above. In addition are the two signed in the past week or two by the President. They are EO12425 (an amendment regarding allowing special privileges to Interpol) and (no number given) one creating a Council of Governors to oversee National Guard. The next meeting on the Small Arms Treaty is in New York in mid July. I hope the NRA will launch a tea party demonstration that dwarfs the 1.7 million who were at the capital on 09/12/2009. Please, if you care anything of the second amendment, watch this NRA video:

Armed Violence and DevelopmentIncreasingly, it is understood that social and economic development can only take off if people feel safe in their communities. This concept brings together issues of disarmament and development in an exciting new way. The 2009 Secretary-General’s report:

Armed violence — the intentional, threatened or actual use of arms to inflict death or injury — takes many forms, ranging from political to criminal to interpersonal violence, and appears in a wide range of contexts. Armed violence not only destroys lives, it also damages infrastructure and property, limits the delivery of public services, undermines investment in human, social and economic capital, and contributes to unproductive expenditures on security services. Armed violence undermines development and constitutes an impediment to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The present report examines different aspects of the relationship between armed violence and development. Across diverse contexts, the risk factors and effects of armed violence are often similar. Young men make up the majority of perpetrators, as well as victims, of armed violence. In certain situations — including in some armed conflicts — women, girls and boys suffer from acute forms of sexual violence. Factors such as weak institutions, systemic economic and horizontal inequalities, exclusion of minority groups, unequal gender relations, limited education opportunities, persistent unemployment, organized crime and illicit markets, and the availability of firearms, alcohol and drugs play an important role in shaping the onset, duration and severity of armed violence.

The United Nations system, regional and subregional organizations, national and local governments, and civil society organizations have mobilized to prevent and reduce armed violence through evidence-based interventions, but responses need to be scaled up. Armed violence prevention and reduction efforts must be carefully designed, targeted and monitored. Programming options include interventions related to conflict prevention and peacebuilding, to interventions targeting demand and risk factors at the individual, relationship and societal levels.

The report places particular emphasis on tackling the risks and effects of armed violence and underdevelopment. This includes implementing existing conventions and agreements associated with armed violence and development; improving the effectiveness of armed violence prevention and reduction policies through investment in the production, analysis and use of evidence; strengthening capacities to diagnose, articulate strategies and implement programmes; developing measurable goals, targets and indicators for armed violence prevention and reduction; building partnerships among the United Nations system and with regional organizations, national authorities and civil society to ensure coherent policy and programming; increasing resources for armed violence prevention and reduction; and fostering greater international action.

V. Observations and recommendations

63. Tackling armed violence successfully requires coordinated responses that draw on different areas of expertise. Many Governments, civil society actors and United Nations entities are starting to work together to address risk factors and the negative effects of armed violence on development, but the international response is still somewhat fragmented. In bringing together donors, Governments of affected States and civil society, as well as in uniting core competencies and developing good practices, the United Nations system is well-positioned to help catalyse more coherent, comprehensive, coordinated and integrated initiatives, and to encourage targeted armed violence prevention and reduction policies and programmes at the international, national and local levels.

64. In order to be successful, policy responses must involve meaningful and legitimate local ownership, and full partnerships between Governments and civil society. They must also be integrated into regional and subregional approaches.

65. In order to be effective in its role as a convenor and catalyst, the United Nations system, as well as national and local governments and civil society, will need to scale up support to affected States in designing and implementing armed violence prevention and response strategies. The following recommendations are proposed:

(a) Strengthen the implementation of existing global conventions and agreements. There is a range of existing agreements that can contribute to the prevention and reduction of armed violence. United Nations agencies should support national Governments to uphold, implement and strengthen existing global and regional norms and measures, including relevant international and regional treaties, conventions and other instruments that contribute to the reduction and prevention of all forms of armed violence. These include the Firearms Protocol; the Programme of Action; the universal conventions and protocols against terrorism; the three conventions on narcotic drugs; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the conventions on the rights of women and children; Security Council resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008) on women, peace and security; and the 2005 World Summit Outcome document. There should also be a concerted effort to ensure that international norms and standards are reflected and implemented at the national and local levels through the adoption of national legislation and other domestic measures.

(b) Improve the effectiveness of armed violence prevention and reduction policies and programmes through investments in the production, analysis and use of evidence. Effective approaches to armed-violence prevention and reduction will require investments by national Governments and international organizations in high-quality data-gathering and analysis capacities. Comprehensive, reliable and timely information is critical for informed policymaking and programming, monitoring and evaluation, and the forecasting of future trends and needs. This will involve ongoing and baseline data collection and analysis, the regular transfer of knowledge and lessons learned and innovative approaches to bring evidence and analysis into the programming process. The most comprehensive picture of conflict, non-conflict and interpersonal armed violence is likely to be obtained from a combination of data drawn from the public health and criminal justice systems, combined with population-based surveys, civil society monitoring, as well as rich historical and cultural research. Routine monitoring and evaluation of armed violence prevention programmes will increase the range of evidence-based options to prevent armed violence available to national authorities, local authorities and civil society.

(c) Strengthen national and local capacities for armed violence prevention and reduction. States have the primary responsibility for preventing and reducing armed violence. Multilateral and bilateral agencies can support Governments of affected countries by strengthening national and local capacities to address armed violence, including capacities to collect reliable data on the scope and scale of armed violence and victimization, and on different risk and resilience factors. This could include the development of national armed violence prevention and reduction strategies, investments in national and local surveillance systems, establishment of effective criminal justice systems based upon the rule of law, including reinforcement of counter-terrorism and policing capacities, and support for programmes targeting specific risk factors and at-risk groups. International agencies and national Governments can also ensure that armed violence prevention and reduction practices are integrated into wider development strategies, such as United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, and other national and local plans. Local actors and in particular governments, community authorities (including local governments and community peace and security committees), research institutions and the media should be supported and strengthened in order to design, implement and measure the effectiveness of local strategies and interventions. Several United Nations stakeholders can be involved in these activities, including the three United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament.

(d) Develop measurable goals, targets and indicators for armed-violence prevention and reduction. A growing body of evidence demonstrates how armed violence hinders the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and, more generally, social, economic, political and human development. Yet armed violence reduction efforts are seldom incorporated into strategies for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The Millennium Development Goal Review Process, starting in 2010, provides an opportunity to consider the reduction of armed violence as an important requisite to meeting the Millennium Development Goals, in particular through the development and endorsement of a set of goals, targets and indicators to achieve measurable reductions in armed violence and tangible improvements in human security. Developing measurable goals on armed violence towards 2015 will offer the opportunity to integrate security-related themes into the possible follow-up of the Millennium Development Goals (see S/2008/258).

Throughout October 2009, governments are attending the First Committee, which proposes and adopts resolutions on disarmament and international security. Their discussions include resolutions on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and small arms control. North American Members List is shown below. Contact information provided for your convenience.

Control: The House and Senate climate bills contain a provision giving the president extraordinary powers in the event of a “climate emergency.” As chief of staff Rahm Emanuel says, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

If you thought the House health care bill that nobody read has hidden passages that threaten our freedoms and liberty, take a peak at the “trigger” placed in the byzantine innards of both the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill and the Kerry-Boxer bill just passed by Democrats out of Sen. Barbara Boxer’s Environment and Public Works Committee.

As Nick Loris of the Heritage Foundation points out, the Kerry-Boxer bill requires the declaration of a “climate emergency” if the concentration of carbon dioxide and other declared greenhouse gases in the atmosphere exceeds 450 parts per million (ppm). It was at about 286 ppm before the Industrial Revolution and now sits at around 368 ppm.

That figure was picked out of a hat because the warm-mongers believe that’s the level at which the polar ice caps will disappear, boats can be moored on the Statue of Liberty’s torch and dead polar bears will wash up on the beaches of Malibu.

The Senate version includes a section that gives the president authority, under this declared “climate emergency,” to “direct all Federal agencies to use existing statutory authority to take appropriate actions … to address shortfalls” in achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions.

What the “appropriate actions” might be are not defined and presumably left up to the discretion of the White House. Could the burning of coal be suspended or recreational driving be banned? Sen. David Vitter, R-La., asked the EPA for a definition and received no response.

Competitive Enterprise Institute scholar Chris Horner says “this agenda transparently is not about GHG concentrations, or the climate. It’s about what the provision would bring: almost limitless power over private economic activity and individual liberty for the activist president and, for the reluctant leader, litigious greens and courts” packed by liberal Democrat appointees.

In an open letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), dated November 2, 2009, members of the Congressional Western Caucus expressed great concern to Attorney General Holder regarding the ongoing and apparent abuse of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by certain organizations including environmental and special interest groups. The Caucus highlights the complete lack of oversight, accountability, and transparency in the overall process and allocation of funds under EAJA, which appears to have contributed to the egregious abuse.

“Environmental groups have been working to deny grazing rights to America’s ranchers for decades. They do so by claiming violations of environmental policy, suing federal environmental agencies and ultimately, tying up ranchers’ time and resources in costly, and often baseless, court battles,” said Jeff Faulkner, Western Legacy Alliance (WLA) member. “What makes this situation worse is the fact that these environmental groups such as Western Watersheds Project and the Center for Biological Diversity are shaking down federal government programs so they can access taxpayer dollars to fund their radical agendas.”

Two of the federal programs that are seemingly handing out millions, and possibly billions, to environmental groups are the EAJA and the Judgment Fund.

The EAJA was established approximately 30 years ago by Congress to ensure that individuals, small businesses and/or public interest groups with limited financial capacity could seek judicial redress from unreasonable government actions that threatened their rights, privileges or interests.

According the U.S. Department of the Treasury website, the Judgment Fund, which was created in the 1960’s, “…is available for most court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government. Congress has added a number of administrative claim awards (settlements by agencies at the administrative level, without a lawsuit). The Judgment Fund has no fiscal year limitations, and there is no need for Congress to appropriate funds to it annually or otherwise. Moreover, disbursements from it are not attributed to or accounted for by the agencies whose activities give rise to awards paid. Absent a specific statutory requirement, the agency responsible is not required to reimburse the Judgment Fund.”

Since 2003, the Judgment Fund has paid out $4.7 billion in judgments, including the reimbursement of attorney’s fees. It appears environmental groups have accessed millions of taxpayer dollars from this fund; however, the Web site reporting these payments does not indicate to whom the payments were made or for what purpose. Additional investigation reveals that the same environmental groups benefiting from EAJA payments are accessing the Judgment Fund to millions of dollars each year.

American taxpayers are being forced to fund thousands of lawsuits filed against the federal government by environmental organizations — with their lawyers clocking thousands of hours and charging fees of up to $650 an hour.

The U.S. government hands out millions of dollars each year to various environmental organizations to help protect fish, wildlife and other aspects of the environment. And every year, those same groups spend millions suing the government over everything from forest policy and carbon emissions to water quality and wolf habitats.

Who paid the attorneys fees? The American taxpayers did.

In the lucrative world of environmental law, the biggest defendant is the federal government, and taxpayers foot the bill. The nation’s ten largest environmental groups have sued the government more than 3,000 times in a nine-year period, according to legal fund the Western Legacy Alliance, an Idaho-based legal fund that defends ranchers and farmers.

Now, the growing number of cases is beginning to attract the attention of some lawmakers in Congress.

Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., has written to the Department of Justice asking for an investigation, pointing out that much of the money being paid comes out of the Equal Access to Justice Act fund, which Congress set up for the indigent and public interest groups to recover legal fees.

Right now, the government does not account for how much is paid out to whom or for what reason.

“These are taxpayer dollars that are being used by the federal government to compensate people who have sued the federal government. I believe that taxpayers have the right to know who those people are and how much they’ve been paid,” Lummis told Fox News.

They should not expect any help from the current Administration, however.

According to the Institute for Energy Research, half of the nearly 1500 page House Cap and Trade Bill is not about carbon emissions at all, but rather completely alter America’s economy. Dr. Robert Michaels, a Senior Fellow with IER, who examined the bill, found that the rest of the bill is packed with regulations that would completely alter the United States’ economy. He argues that even without cap-and-trade, Waxman-Markey is the most repressive package of new taxes, wealth transfers and obstacles to economic activity that a Congress has ever assembled. His findings are available in a 39 page pdf document.

To further make the point this is not about science, but rather control, President Obama announced this week, after Climate gate broke, he will indeed flip-flop on attending Copenhagen and will, at the conference, obligate America to unreasonable carbon emission standards, which cut emissions by 17%, by 2020.

CCX owns the Chicago, Montreal and London Climate exchanges. CCX is 10% owned by Goldman Sachs (GS) and 10% owned by Generation Investment Management (GIM), an investment firm founded & chaired by Al Gore. This firm was co-founded by the former Treasury Secretary under George W. Bush and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson.

Goldman Sachs was the number one private donor to the Obama campaign.

An article in UK’s Telegraph earlier this month said Al Gore is positioned to be the world’s first Carbon billionaire. And a blog entitled American Everyman talks about Al Gore’s partnership with former Goldman Sachs and Leeman Brothers execs, as well as other Venture Capitalists. He posts the first of these very educational videos as well:

On it’s Board of Directors, none other than Maurice Strong.

External Advisory board chair Chicago Mayor and Friend of Obama, Richard Dailey, and among it’s members are Ed BegleyJr., Joseph P. Kennedy II, and former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Michael Zammit Cutajar.

As well, General Electric, owners of NBC and affiliate cable channels, often criticized for it’s pro-Obama stance, will help facilitate the carbon transfers through it’s arm, known as Greenhouse Gas Services, as well as through the various “green initiatives” facilitated by the company.

Another of the big players is also involved:

Bloomberg noted: Billionaire George Soros, looking to address the “political problem” of climate change, said he will invest $1 billion in clean-energy technology and donate $100 million to an environmental advisory group to aid policymakers. [He] announced the investment in Copenhagen on Oct. 10 at a meeting on climate change sponsored by Project Syndicate. The group is an international association made up of 430 newspapers from 150 countries.

…Soros’s announcement comes two months before 190 nations will gather in the Danish capital for a final round of negotiations on a new climate treaty that includes provisions to finance clean- energy projects in developing nations. Talks last week in Bangkok were marked by a dispute between richer and poorer nations over whether to renew or abandon the Kyoto Protocol, the only existing global agreement to reduce carbon dioxide, which is blamed for global warming.

Soros, 79, also will establish the Climate Policy Initiative, a San Francisco-based organization to which he will donate $10 million a year for 10 years.

Soros made his fortune, as you’ll recall, by trashing the pound culminating in Britain’s Black Wednesday in 1992. He is systematically attempting the same thing here and has recently launched another new initiative “The Institute for New Economic Thinking“.

The fact of the matter is, while Cap and Trade deals with the corporate side of carbon, it’s just a jumping off point. Anyone familiar with United Nations Agenda 21 can plainly see it will, in short time, lead to what amounts to a “Breath Tax”, placed on every living thing. This is being undertaken the same way politicians are building Health Care “Reform” for the sole purpose of getting to a single-payer system, also called for in Agenda 21. Neither addresses any substantive issue, they only give control to the government and the UN.

In another great Canada Free Press column by Tim Ball, renowned environmental consultant and former climatology professor, he points out:

Extreme left journalist George Monbiot ignored all the facts I provided when he was pointing a finger at me. He’s ignoring them again, which forces him to assume the deniers are at fault. He wrote, “There is no point in denying it: we’re losing. Climate change denial is spreading like a contagious disease. It exists in a sphere that cannot be reached by evidence or reasoned argument; any attempt to draw attention to scientific findings is greeted with furious invective. This sphere is expanding with astonishing speed.”

The sphere is expanding for several reasons.

All evidence rejects the hypothesis that human CO2 is causing warming or climate change.

Facts are gradually getting to the public despite obstructionism by journalists like Monbiot.

Temperature projections of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are consistently wrong.

Record cold temperatures are occurring everywhere.

Motives of those pushing the need for reduction in CO2 are being exposed.

Economic costs of a completely unnecessary action are emerging.

A blogger named Granite Grok put up a couple really interesting graphs on their blog I found rather to the point, which clearly show 2009 to be one of the coldest years in recent history, and United States and European emissions are and have been fairly flat since all this started in 1970, compared to those on a global scale.

Britain’s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, suffered a data breach in recent days when a hacker apparently broke into their system and made away with thousands of emails and documents. The stolen data was then posted to a Russian server and has quickly made the rounds among climate skeptics. The documents within the archive, if proven to be authentic, would at best be embarrassing for many prominent climate researchers and at worst, damning.

The electronic break in itself has been verified by the director of the research unit, Professor Phil Jones. He told Britain’s Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”

The paper goes on to discuss, at length the individual emails, and if you have not yet seen them, I urge to to follow the link.

…So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory – a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. I’ve been adding some of the most astonishing in updates below – emails suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. If it is as it now seems, never again will “peer review” be used to shout down skeptics.

This is clearly not the work of some hacker, but of an insider who’s now blown the whistle.

Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal. In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”.

“The files contain so much material that it is going to take some time t o put it all in context,” says Ball. “However, enough is already known to underscore their explosive nature. It is already clear the entire claims and positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based on falsified manipulated material and is therefore completely compromised.

“The fallout will be extensive as material continues to emerge. Reputations of the scientists involved are already destroyed, however fringe players will continue to be identified and their reputations destroyed or sullied.”

While the mainstream media is bending into pretzels to keep the scandal under the rug, Climategate is already the biggest scientific scandal in history because of the global policy implications.

According to Fascistsoup.com, there’s more to those emails appears at first glance. I urge you to watch these two, fairly lengthy videos, together taking about 15 minutes of your time, but ending in priceless understanding. Education is a valuable thing.

Those pushing the leftist theology call all who find fault with the global warming agenda “Deniers”. I must ask now who the REAL “DENIERS” are? Remember Alinsky doctrine – if you can not dispute the facts, launch personal attacks. To them I must say,

“Sticks and stones may break my bones,

but names will never hurt me.

Deceit and lies will fuel your side,

but with facts we will subvert thee.”

Ed Note: Please read Green Hell by Steve Milloy, our first book of the month selection here at Soldier For Liberty. You will become enlightened on the truth of the “Green Agenda”.

I came upon a story yesterday on the Accuracy In Media site that revealed a surprising connection between the Catholic Church and George Soros.

The critical role of the Catholic Church in passing national health care reform legislation is coming under serious media scrutiny. But the story has taken a strange turn. It has now been revealed that George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator and well-known atheist, has been pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into “progressive” Catholic groups that are significant players in the national debates over health care and immigration.

On the surface, it would appear that Soros would be opposed to many positions of the Catholic Church. A major financial backer of the ACLU, Soros supports such causes as drug legalization, the rights of “sex workers” and felons, euthanasia, radical feminism, abortion rights, and homosexual rights. He does all of this in the name of promoting an “open society.”

The article when on to say collections at many Catholic Churches the weekend of 11/21 and 11/22/2009 will be designated for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, which uses the money to fund ACORN, Gamaliel and other radical community activist groups around the country. ACORN donations have been suspended at present, according to the group. There are many potically progressive causes which have, for one reason or another, aligned themselves with the Catholic Church.

The article contained many surprising Soros connections, which peaked my curiousity. I was shocked when going through the list to learn how many organizations exist for the sole purpose of turning our country upside down. While going through the list, I noticed what is becoming a clear pattern for progressives, who apparently live in some alternate universe. Just as Congress is doing with bills proposed of late, the names of these foundations, in many cases, do the opposite of what they proport to do. I noticed a lot of indoctrination of our youth as well, another now familiar pattern.

It is obvious to me, more so everyday, progressives are the enemy. There is no need for a violent takeover. They are systematically impoding our country from the inside. Please check out this list. I have included the information just as I found it on the Soros Open Society website. In the days ahead we will enlighten you as to the unamerican adgena George Soros, apparently with the help of the Catholic Church and others, is currently funding.

Air Traffic Control
2008

To provide general support to the Air Traffic Control Education Fund, which helps musicians use their talent and high profiles to effect social change by connecting them to activists, organizations, and issue campaigns.

To support Air Traffic Control, an Oakland-based organization which supports musicians and managers in lending their talents to social justice by connecting concerned artists to activists, advocacy organizations and issue advocacy campaigns.

To support American Rights at Work Education Fund (ARAWEF), a national organization which advances workers’ rights for people seeking a voice and better conditions on the job. ARAWEF builds diverse coalitions, conducts public education campaigns, and builds innovative engagement efforts to engage community and business support.

To provide general support to Asian Pacific Islander American Vote, a national non-partisan organization that encourages local nonprofits working in Asian American communities to build civic and voter engagement activities into their work.

To support the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center Foundation, which provides social justice organizations with education, research, and strategic assistance on ballot initiatives and referendums at the local and state levels across the nation.

A grant to support the Bus Federation, a unique coalition of five state organizations in Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington that seek to engage young people in civic engagement work and develop them as leaders.

A grant to support Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, a national organization that educates Catholics and the broader public about the Catholic social justice vision of the common good and connects that vision to specific advocacy efforts.

To support Campus Progress, which seeks to cultivate a new generation of writers, policy analysts, communications specialists, and activists to build a progressive movement in which young leaders play a leading role in achieving lasting gains for this country.

To support the national convening of the Civic Engagement Networks Project, an emerging effort that includes participation from the Center for Community Change’s Community Voting Project; National Coalition for Black Civic Participation; Pushback Network; State Voices; and the We Are America Alliance.

To provide general support for the Center for Community Change, a national organization and resource center for grassroots organizations, which seeks to build the power and capacity of low-income people, particularly people of color, to change their communities and the public policies that affect their lives.

To support the Center for Community Change, a national resource center for grassroots social justice organizations, with a particular emphasis on groups working in low-income, people of color and immigrant communities.

To support the Center for Progressive Leadership, a national training institute dedicated to developing the next generation of progressive political leaders through intensive training programs for youth, advocates, and future candidates.

To support the Student PIRGs, a national organization which facilitates non-partisan student activism by recruiting and training college students to become engaged in policy campaigns, elections, and the political process.

To provide general support for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of the nation’s premier policy organizations working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

To support Choice USA, an organization which mobilizes and develops the skills of young people to be the leaders of a more inclusive and effective reproductive justice movement. This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund.

To provide general support to the Civic Engagement Fund, a re-granting fund dedicated to providing training, education, and technological resources to a national network of leaders and organizations that build capacity for nonpartisan civic engagement, public policy advocacy, and issue-related programs.

To support the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

To support Democracia U.S.A., a Miami-based national organization that advances civic engagement among the nation’s fasting growing demographic group by conducting nonpartisan voter registration and voter education in Latina/o communities.

To provide general support for the Drum Major Institute, a New York City-based think tank focused on promoting progressive economic and social policies, including DMI’s Scholars and Fellows program, focused on the development of a new generation of policy and advocacy leaders from diverse backgrounds.

To support the Mississippi Economic Policy Center’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

A grant to support Faith in Public Life, a national strategy center advancing faith in the public square as a positive and unifying force for justice, compassion, and the common good. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Equality and Opportunity Fund in recognition of Faith in Public Life’s work to advance comprehensive immigration reform.

To support the Four Freedoms Fund at Public Interest Projects, a collaborative grantmaking pool that addresses issues related to advancing the rights of immigrants, including a nonpartisan civic engagement initiative focused on building the civic engagement capacity of local immigrants’ rights organizations.

A grant to support the annual immigrant civic engagement convening for the Four Freedoms Fund at Public Interest Projects, a national funding collaborative established to safeguard immigrants’ civil rights and civil liberties and promote the full participation of immigrants in a democratic society.

A grant to support the Roosevelt Institute’s work on economic policy and its student-led network of campus think tanks that connect student ideas to advocacy. This grant is co-funded by the Seize the Day Initiative in recognition of Roosevelt’s leadership in creating a new economic paradigm.

To support the Gamaliel Foundation, a network of grassroots, interfaith, interracial issue organizations working to build power and a more just society, in its Faith and Democracy Campaign, which combines faith and values work with organizing around issues at the state and national levels.

A grant to support the Generational Alliance, a national collaboration of youth engagement organizations working to empower low-income youth, youth of color, and LGBTQ youth through community organizing and non-partisan voter engagement, arts and culture, communication and media, policy, and leadership development.

A grant to support the Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training, a national organization that promotes the connection between fundraising, social justice, and social justice movement building, particularly for people of color communities and organizations.

To provide general support to the Grassroots Policy Project, an educational and research organization working in partnership with grassroots community groups, activist networks, statewide coalitions and other training organizations to encourage strategic approaches to issues of social and economic justice.

To support the Hip Hop Caucus (HHC), an emerging national organization that inspires non-partisan voter participation and community engagement from the hip hop generation, specifically from young people who are not on college campuses. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Campaign for Black Male Achievement in recognition of HHC’s work to advance civic participation from—and green jobs for—young Black men.

To provide general support for the Interfaith Education Fund, which provides organizing, technical assistance, training, and research support to a broad-based network of local interfaith coalitions known as the Industrial Areas Foundation.

To support the Funders’ Collaborative on Youth Organizing, a national intermediary that increases funding for youth organizing groups and develops strategies to promote to funders the importance of investment in the leadership of low-income youth of color in social justice organizing.

To support the Kentucky Tax and Budget Initiative’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

To provide general support for the League of Young Voters Education Fund, which engages and supports young people, particularly those who do not attend college, those from low-income communities, and youth of color, helping them to lead and actively participate in creating change in their communities.

To support the Louisiana Budget Project’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

A grant to support the Movement Strategy Center for its work to strengthen the social justice movement through increasing the capacity of individuals, organizations, alliances, and sectors to be more strategic, collaborative, and sustainable.

To provide general support for the Movement Strategy Center, which strengthens the progressive movement by teaching organizers and organizations training, movement building, and networking skills through capacity-building, convenings, and research and information.

To support the National Domestic Workers Alliance, a New York City and Oakland-based coalition of 15 domestic worker organizations from 10 major cities that seeks to organize and build the power of domestic workers to improve their living and working conditions, bring visibility to the struggles of this unrecognized workforce, and end the exclusion of domestic workers from protection as a workforce.

| $200,000 | 2 years

National Organizers Alliance
2008

To support the National Organizers Alliance in launching a new web-based career center and job clearinghouse, “Organizers for America,” for community organizers seeking to work with civil rights, faith, issue, labor, and neighborhood organizations.

To support the National Training and Information Center (NTIC), a 36 year old national resource center that supports, strengthens, and coordinates multi-issue grassroots community organizations working for social and economic justice, on housing, fiscal service regulation, and immigration issues. (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund’s Neighborhood Stabilization Initiative and the Seize the Day special funding initiative.)

To support the New America Foundation’s Next Social Contract initiative, a domestic policy effort to develop a new metanarrative to assess how the American social contract evolved, why it fails to meet needs today, and how it can be reinvented for the conditions of a largely post-industrial and increasingly diverse society.

To support the New Democracy Project—a think tank and advocacy organization that promotes democratic participation, economic fairness, and social justice—and the Center for American Progress in producing an agency-by-agency guide for a new administration relying on leading scholars, authors, and former officals. (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund, National Security and Human Rights Campaign, and Transparency & Integrity Fund.)

To support the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

To support New Organizing Institute, a Washington, DC-based organization that enhances civic engagement and social justice organizing by enabling nonprofit groups to take advantage of the latest advances in new technology.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest / National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights
2009

To support the New York City-based National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights, a nationwide coalition of lawyers, academics, students and community activists that joined together in response to a series of Supreme Court decisions that have eroded civil rights protections, particularly in the area of federalism.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest / Campaign to Restore Civil Rights
2008

To support the Campaign to Restore Civil Rights, a coalition of over eighty federal, state, and local organizations that seek restoration of key legal protections eroded by federal courts over the past decade.

A grant to support the Nonprofit Voter Engagement Network, a national alliance of direct and human service providers and agencies building the civic engagement capacity of the nonprofit social service sector.

To support the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

To provide general support for the Partnership for Working Families, which provides research and technical assistance to a network of metropolitan-based economic justice organizations focused on community benefit agreements.

A grant to support the Partnership for Working Families, a national network that provides policy, communications, research, organizing and legal resources to metro-based affiliates that are working to advance economic and social justice in their communities.

To support Young People For, which provides fellowships and internships to youth in an effort to diversify the leadership of social change movements, support young people to effect change, and sustain social change leadership over the long term.

To support the PICO National Network, a 36-year-old network of congregation-based community organizations which brings the voices of people of faith and faith leaders to the public debate on national priorities, including housing, health care, and immigration. (This project was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund’s Neighborhood Stabilization Initiative and the Seize the Day special funding initiative.)

A grant to support the Progressive States Network for its work to provide non-partisan support to state legislators with background research on public policy and linking legislators and state advocates to each other across state lines.

A grant to support the Pushback Network, a national collaboration of grassroots groups and networks, that seeks to build “bottom-up” state-based alliances to increase civic participation by leaders from marginalized communities.

To support the Right to the City Alliance, an emerging national network of local base-building organizations and allies committed to building a movement for urban justice, human rights, and democracy, in a strategic planning and organizational assessment process.

To support Right to the City Alliance, a Brooklyn, NY-based emerging national alliance of more than 50 urban base-building organizations and allies committed to building a movement for urban justice, human rights, and democracy.

A grant to support the Rockwood Leadership Program, a national non-profit that promotes social change by providing individuals, organizations, and issue sectors with powerful and effective training in leadership and collaboration.

To support the Rockwood Leadership Program in conducting an independent, thorough evaluation of its programs, and to provide underwriting support for the incoming class of its most advanced offering, Leading from the Inside Out, the Rockwood Yearlong Fellowship for Social Change Leaders.

To provide general support for Ruckus Society, a capacity-building and intermediary organization that provides trainings to grassroots organizations and young individuals working on environmental, human rights, and social justice issues.

To support the Harlem-based Social Justice Leadership which provides innovative high-quality leadership training to staff of community organizations, labor unions, and other grassroots social justice organizations in Miami, New Orleans, and New York City.

To support State Voices, a network that supports year-round state tables for 501(c)(3) organizations that foster collaborative issue policy work, economies of scale, rigorous evaluation, and efforts to engage socially responsible and historically underrepresented communities in and out of election seasons.

A grant to support State Voices, the convener and technical assistance provider for 16 permanent, year-round state tables for more than 545 diverse non-partisan 501(c)(3) organizations that foster collaborative voter engagement and multi-issue advocacy work.

To support the Civic Engagement Fund, housed at State Voices, which provides shared voter file access, trainings, and technical and strategic support to more than 540 local, state, and national affiliate non-profit organizations seeking to enhance non-partisan voter participation in sixteen states.

To support the Opportunity Agenda, a social justice organization that works collaboratively with other organizations, spanning isolated issues and constituencies, to integrate strategic communications with those organizations’ advocacy and research. This grant was co-funded by the OSI Equality and Opportunity Fund.

To support WireTap Magazine, based in San Francisco, CA, an influential independent news and culture youth web magazine which amplifies the voices of young people from diverse backgrounds in order to shape the political discourse and spotlight issues that impact their lives.

To provide general support to the Tobin Project, an alliance of leading academics across the social sciences and humanities that redirects and harnesses academic work for public purposes and policy debates.

A grant to support United for a Fair Economy’s Tax Fairness Organizing Collaborative, a national network of state-based organizations that educates and organizes for fair taxation at the state and local levels.

To provide general support for the United States Student Association Foundation, which provides education and organizing materials, technical assistance, and training to students in the United States Student Association network who are organizing on issues of access on the campus, state, and federal level.

To support the Center for State Innovation, an effort to provide policy advice and research to innovative state executives (governors, secretaries of state, attorneys general, and treasurers, primarily).

A grant to support Voto Latino (VL), an emerging national organization that informs and motivates Latino youth to engage in civic participation by leveraging the latest technologies to promote positive change. This grant is co-funded by U.S. Programs’ Strategic Opportunities Fund in recognition of VL’s census outreach leadership and the Seize the Day Initiative in recognition of VL’s cutting edge use of new media outreach strategies.

To support Campus Camp Wellstone, a project of the Wellstone Action Fund, which runs trainings and develops curriculum for a diverse community of young people and organizations that seek to inspire greater activism from young people.

To provide general support to the Western States Center, which seeks to build a movement for political reform and economic, racial and environmental justice in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Alaska.

To support Western States Center, a Portland, OR-based organization that builds power to advance social justice through provide training, consultation and resources to a wide range of community and constituency-based organizations in the Pacific Northwest, Great Basin, and Intermountain West states.

Wisconsin Council on Children and Families / Wisconsin Budget Project
2008

To support the Wisconsin Budget Project’s work as part of the State Fiscal Analysis Initiative, a network run out of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and which provides state-based research and policy support around budget, tax, and fiscal issues in state capitals in ways that advance the interests of low- and middle-income Americans. The Open Society Institute is part of a funding collaborative that divides up State Fiscal Analysis Initiative groups for grantmaking purposes.

To support the Youth Engagement Fund and Table, which coordinates a 501(c)(3) table of national youth groups and their field programs aimed at mobilizing and permanently engaging young voters, ages 18-29.

| $250,000 | 1 year

Youth Engagement Fund and Table
2009

A grant to support the Youth Engagement Fund and Table housed at the Tides Foundation, a non-partisan 501(c)(3) collaborative table of youth civic engagement organizations that exists to increase the ability of each group to meet voter registration and mobilization goals.

By electing clean Secretaries of State in 2010, we can ensure fair elections in 2012 across the country. We’re endorsing great candidates who support our goals – and we need your help to get them elected!

We’ve helped to elect 11 of 13 election reform candidates in key states like Minnesota and Ohio. Winning in these states has made a difference already, and now we’re gearing up for more wins in 2010.

By making a small contribution you can make sure unethical Secretaries of State like her and Ken Blackwell, never get to suppress our votes again.Dollar for dollar, the SoS Project is one of the most effective political investments you can make.

Since we launched in the fall of 2005, we have engaged in eleven races and have backed the winning candidate in nine states, including: Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada, West Virginia and Missouri. We lost only in Michigan and Colorado (and there by a tiny margin).

In 2008, we ran a sophisticated, highly targeted campaign in Montana which made the difference in a major upset – ousting the incumbent Republican Secretary of State. Most analysts anticipate a tough 2010 Senate race in Montana, and it is critical to have a fair Secretary of State in place. In Oregon last year we helped beat back a late unexpected surge to capture a critical open seat.

We are proud of our 2006 victory in Minnesota, where long time reformer Mark Ritchie pulled off a major upset, with our support. He was under fierce media and legal scrutiny as he oversaw the recount of the Franken/Coleman senatorial race, and operated with transparency and integrity, such that the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously ruled to uphold the extremely close election results, finally sending Franken to the Senate, where his vote is much needed.

We pride ourselves on being fast, nimble, and strategic in our spending. Potential donors should know that the SoS Project’s startup and overhead costs are already fully funded. So your contributions go to providing money directly to candidates in targeted races and independent expenditure campaigns in critical states, not to our operational costs.

We seek donations to our SoS Strategic Fund for three purposes:

to establish state political committees that will conduct innovative independent expenditure campaigns.

to build a reserve that can be deployed, where legally permissible, to benefit the races where it will matter most in the hectic final days before the election.

to grow the donor base for crucial down ballot races by spreading the story to new donors through paid online and social network marketing and activism campaigns.

The Secretary of State Fund, a non-federal 527, can accept unlimited contributions.

Who are these people? According to their website, they are:

Becky Bond works for a socially progressive mobile telephone company based in San Francisco. She serves on the board of the New Organizing Institute* and ActBlue.com*.

Lola Elfman is has served as an organizer and trainer for The New Organizing Institute* since 2007, she served as Internet Director for Phil Angelides’ campaign for California Governor*, and was a consultant with M+R Strategic Services*.

Megan Hull was a Project Director for Democracy Reform at the Center for Civic Participation*. In 2004, she was a Co-Director of the coalition that investigated polling place problems and vote counting irregularities in Ohio and New Mexico.

Michael Kieschnick is a social entrepreneur based in San Francisco. He is also a board member of the League of Conservation Voters, among other progressive organizations.

The founders of the Secretary of State Project, which claims to advance “election protection” but only backs Democrats, religiously believe that right-leaning secretaries of state helped the GOP steal the presidential elections in Florida in 2000 (Katherine Harris) and in Ohio in 2004 (Ken Blackwell).

The secretary of state candidates the group endorses sing the same familiar song about electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the dead and fictional characters from voter rolls should be avoided until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist, democracy-hating Fascist.

The group was co-founded in July 2006 by James Rucker, formerly director of grassroots mobilization for MoveOn.org Political Action and Moveon.org Civic Action. “Any serious commitment to wrestling control of the country from the Republican Party must include removing their political operatives from deciding who can vote and whose votes will count,” said another co-founder, Becky Bond, to the San Francisco Chronicle in 2006.

Its website claims, “A modest political investment in electing clean candidates to critical Secretary of State offices is an efficient way to protect the election.” Indeed. Political observers know that a relatively small amount of money can help swing a little-watched race for a state office few people understand or care about.

In 2006, the Minnesota ACORN Political Action Committee endorsed Ritchie and donated to his campaign. According to the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, contributors to Ritchie’s campaign included liberal philanthropists George Soros, Drummond Pike, and Deborah Rappaport, along with veteran community organizer Heather Booth, a Saul Alinsky disciple who co-founded the Midwest Academy, a radical ACORN clone. One article on Ritchie’s 2006 campaign website brags about the fine work ACORN did in Florida to pass a constitutional amendment to raise that state’s minimum wage.

It was revealed during a panel discussion at the Democratic Party’s convention in Denver this summer that the Democracy Alliance, a financial clearinghouse created by Soros and insurance magnate Peter B. Lewis, approved the Secretary of State Project as a grantee. The Democracy Alliance aspires to create a permanent political infrastructure of nonprofits, think tanks, media outlets, leadership schools, and activist groups-a kind of “vast left-wing conspiracy” to compete with the conservative movement. It has brokered more than $100 million in grants to liberal nonprofits including ACORN. The aforementioned Pike and Rappaport, who gave money to Ritchie’s campaign, are members of the Democracy Alliance.

According to IRS 8872 disclosure forms, the Secretary of State Project received donations from Democracy Alliance members including Soros, Rob Stein, Gail Furman, and Susie Tompkins Buell.

Who now heads the Democracy Alliance? Howard Dean.

What does SOS say of their recent victories:

In 2006, SoS Project donors helped raise over $500,000 to elect reform candidates in 5 key battleground states – Ohio, Nevada, Minnesota, Iowa and New Mexico. We raised over $200,000 in Ohio to defeat Ken Blackwell with one of the most progressive election officers in the nation, Jennifer Brunner. In the 2008 presidential election, Secretary of State Brunner made decision after decision to keep the election clean and make every vote count. In Minnesota, we helped Mark Ritchie beat a Republican incumbent. Because of Secretary of State Ritchie’s dedication to fairness and transparency, a recount in the Coleman-Franken Senate race ensured every vote was counted and resulted in the certification of Al Franken’s narrow victory in the 2008 Minnesota Senate contest. Dollar for dollar, the SoS Project was one of 2006’s most effective political investments.

The 2008 election was a magnificent one for the Secretary of State Project and our savvy group of supporters helping to win 4 of 4 races! Not only did we help oust a republican Secretary of State incumbent and win three other seats, but we also witnessed returns (as noted above) from our 2006 work to elect Secretaries of State in key presidential battleground states. In Montana alone, we launched a highly targeted campaign to put Linda McCulloch over the top by just 5,305 votes. In a state where Senator John Tester won his seat by less than 1% of the vote, Secretary of State Linda McCulloch will be able to ensure that every vote is counted when he runs for reelection in 2010. Our campaign made the difference.

Mark Ritchie, a Democrat and former community organizer, largely controlled the electoral process that seated Al Franken as the 60th Democrat in the Senate. Incumbent Republican Norm Coleman led Democrat Al Franken by 341 votes and the Democrats controlled 57 seats in the Senate, compared to the Republicans’ 40. The Minnesota seat was the only one that Democrats could try to steal. Franken was endorsed by ACORN Votes, ACORN’s federal political action committee. Minnesota’s secretary of state isn’t a Democrat by happenstance. Ritchie, who defeated two-term incumbent Republican Mary Kiffmeyer in 2006, received an endorsement and financial assistance for his run from a below-the-radar non-federal “527” group called the Secretary of State Project. The entity can accept unlimited financial contributions and doesn’t have to disclose them publicly until well after the election. The founders of the Secretary of State Project, which claims to advance “election protection” only backs Democrats. The secretary of state candidates the group endorses sing the same familiar song about electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the dead and fictional characters from voter rolls should be avoided until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist, democracy-hating Fascist.

…In 2006, along with Minnesota’s Ritchie, SoS Project-endorsed Jennifer Brunner (Ohio), who defied federal law by refusing to take steps to verify 200,000 questionable voter registrations, trounced her opponent, 55% to 41%.

The idea for SoSP germinated shortly after that 2004 election, when the group’s Democrat founders blamed Kerry’s defeat on then-Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, who had ruled that Ohio (where Bush won by a relatively slim 118,599-vote margin) would not count provisional ballots — even those submitted by properly registered voters — if they had been submitted at the wrong precinct. Though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ultimately upheld Blackwell’s decision, SoSP’s founders nonetheless received the ruling with the same bitterness they had felt regarding former Florida (Republican) Secretary of State Katherine Harris’s handling of the infamous ballot recount in 2000 (when Bush defeated Al Gore in the presidential election). Moreover, SoSP’s founders accused Blackwell and Republicans of conspiring to suppress Democratic voter turnout in Ohio. “We were tired of Republican manipulation of elections,” said SoSP co-founder Michael Kieschnick, who also serves as President of Working Assets. “It seemed like lots of decisions were made by people who were pretty clearly political operatives.”

To establish “election protection” against similar disappointments in subsequent political races, SoSP in 2006 targeted its funding efforts on the Secretary of State races in seven swing states — Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Colorado, and Michigan. Democrats emerged victorious in five of those seven elections — all except Colorado and Michigan. As USA Today reported at the time: “The political battle for control of the federal government has opened up a new front: the obscure but vital state offices that determine who votes and how those votes are counted.”

What about NY 23 and Hoffman?

Expecting a Hoffman win, based on poll results, the following statement was put out by Big Governement.com

Multiple sources on the ground in New York’s 23rd Congressional district confirm that ACORN is expected to be actively protesting the election results in Clinton County, New York tomorrow. This move comes on the heels of a legal win for the Hoffman camp today as it was ruled that all poll watchers would have to be registered voters of NY 23.

Rob Ryan, spokesman for the Hoffman campaign, states that the legal decision is all about ballot security and that the move by ACORN is not a surprise.

“The Working Family Party is desperate, Today’s poll show that Doug Hoffman is drawing votes from all Demographics”.

While the focus tomorrow will be on securing a win for Hoffman, Ryan says there are still worries about:

“voter intimidation, absentee ballot fraud and groups like ACORN/Working Families Party and big labor stealing the election from the people of the 23rd district.”

Of course, Hoffman lost to Democrat Bill Owens, by a very slight margin, estimated at under 4% of the vote. Slight enough that I wondered what impact, if any, did groups like ACORN, Democracy Alliance and others of that sort have in this election? How many votes are yet to count or set aside? I can not answer, but would love to know. Were there any irregularities?

In neighboring NY 21 there was plenty of fraud as Eric Shawn at Fox News reported October 20,2009:

Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out, according to records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y. Enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the November election to the Democrats

Brian Suozzo voted with an absentee ballot in the Working Families Party primary on Sept. 15 because, as his application stated, he was “at home recovering from medical procedure.”

Jessica Boomhower’s application said she would be attending a “work conference in Boston.”

Michael Ward couldn’t vote in person because he was “taking care of elderly parent.”

Kimberlee Truell was on a “Bus trip to casino,” as was Miguel Vazques.

The only problem with these absentee ballot records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y., is that they’re phony, voters and investigators say — and they’ve prompted what’s being called an unprecedented investigation of suspected voter fraud.

Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out — enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the city council and county elections in November to the Democrats. Candidates would have been able to run both on the Democratic and Working Families Party lines in two weeks, and that could have given the Democrats the general election.

A special prosecutor is investigating the case and criminal charges are possible. New York State Supreme Court Judge Michael Lynch ruled that there were “significant election law violations that have compromised the rights of numerous voters and the integrity of the election process.”

Among the reasons cited on the fraudulent forms for absentee voting: “traveling to Buffalo,” attending a “screen printing conference in Syracuse,” “working late shift,” “working construction,” and “home — ill.”

“Someone took my signature and voted with it and I felt extremely violated,” Suozzo told Fox News. He is a soft-spoken 28-year-old environmental engineer who says he never saw, let alone signed, the Working Families Party Absentee ballot application that carried his supposed signature. He was flabbergasted that someone would vote for him and submit it.

“The whole thing seems dirty to me,” Suzzo said. “You wonder how often this happens and people don’t get caught.”

He says he did not have any type of medical procedure, adding “I haven’t been to the hospital in years.”

“I feel that I was gypped,” Boomhower said, ruefully. “I didn’t get to cast my vote on my own.”

Boomhower, a 28-year-old home health care worker, says three men came to her door asking her to sign a ballot application. It wasn’t until after the election that a private investigator brought her the news that an absentee ballot indeed showed she had voted, when she actually had not.

“I can’t believe they thought they would get away with this,” she says angrily, noting that the false claim that she was in Boston could have jeopardized her job. “I don’t want to see this get tossed aside,” she told Fox News.

Michael Ward, whose ballot said he was taking care of an elderly parent, said “I got one parent left, and he lives in Albany and takes care of himself.”

“They tried to steal an election,” says Bob Mirch, the majority leader of the Rensselaer County legislature who suspected voter fraud and started the investigation after being alerted to a large number of absentee ballot application requests that were noticed by the Republican Board of Elections commissioner .

“Not only does it undermine the system, but if these people were allowed to do this, we could never have a fair election… I’ve been doing this for 35 years, when I saw this, it sends a chill through my body right now.”

…The Working Families Party has recently gained strength, and controversy, in New York. Republican and Democratic candidates in the Empire State can also run on third party lines, such as the Working Families Party, as well as the Liberal, Conservative, and Independence parties, among others. The extra line means extra votes that could bring victory.

Hillary Clinton garnered 2.7 percent of her total votes from the WFP line when she first ran for Senate in 2000, which increased to 5 percent of her total vote in 2006. In September, Clinton’s former campaign manager for her 2000 Senate run, New York City Councilman Bill DeBlasio, who has been endorsed by the WFP, beat two long-established politicians in the Democratic primary. Critics also accuse the Working Families Party of having a long association with the troubled activist group, ACORN. Bertha Lewis, ACORN’s CEO, is one of the party’s co-founders. The New York Times reported this month that “Patrick Gaspard, the White House political director, worked with ACORN in New York to set up the Working Families political party and sat on the party’s board with Ms. Lewis.”

The WFP has also endorsed New York Democratic Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, who was one of only seven Senators who voted against cutting federal housing funds to ACORN in September.

…”We caught this isolated incident, but how many times has this happened?” asks Suozzo, one of the registered Working Families Party voters who didn’t even know about his vote.

Boomhower is blunt about politicians: “They’re corrupt. I’m sure this goes on a lot in politics, but its very rare that they do get caught.”

So, once again, George Soros, ACORN and the host of usual players are allowed to skirt the system to their own benefit. If you can’t win fair and square, win by any means necessary.

They are already formulating their campaigns for 2010. We need to keep that in mind. Watchdogs in the states touted by the SOS website as targets need to be on high alert and need to point out to fellow constituents what is really happening. Letters to the editor are a very effective tool for this as is calling local radio talk shows to bring up the subject.

GEORGE SOROS- A Primer: DISCOVER THE NETWORKS SAYS: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977 Multi-billionaire funder of leftwing causes and groups Founder of the Open Society Institute Stated that defeating President Bush in the 2004 election “is the central focus of my life” George Soros was born on August 12, 1930 in Budapest, Hungary. His father, Teodoro Schwartz, was an Orthodox Jew who, in 1936, changed the family surname from Schwartz to Soros in order to enable his family to conceal its Jewish identity and thus to survive the Nazi Holocaust. In 1947 Soros’ family relocated from Hungary to England. Five years later, George graduated from the London School of Economics. He subsequently worked for a London stockbroker.

In 1956 Soros, with meager personal assets, emigrated to the United States. He would go on to become one of the world’s leading hedge fund investors and currency traders. In 1969 he started his enormously successful Quantum Fund, which, over the ensuing three decades, yielded its long-term investors a four thousand-fold gain on their initial 1969 investments.

In a $10 billion 1992 deal whose success was contingent upon the devaluation of the British Pound, Soros earned himself a $1 billion profit and the title, “the man who broke the Bank of England.” To date, he has amassed a personal fortune exceeding $7 billion. In addition, his management company controls billions of dollars more in investor assets.

In 1979 Soros established the Open Society Institute (OSI), which serves as the flagship of a network of Soros foundations that donate tens of millions of dollars each year to a wide array of individuals and organizations that share the founder’s agendas. Those agendas can be summarized as follows: promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation
promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States
opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act
depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral
promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws
promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes
promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens
defending the civil rights and liberties of suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters
financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left
advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending
opposing the death penalty in all circumstances
promoting socialized medicine in the United States
promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”
bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations
promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike
promoting taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand
advocating stricter gun-control measures
advocating the legalization of marijuana Organizations that, in recent years, have received direct funding and assistance from George Soros and his Open Society Institute (OSI) include the following. (Comprehensive profiles of each are available in the “Groups” section of DiscoverTheNetworks.org):Alliance for Justice: Best known for its activism vis a vis the appointment of federal judges, this group consistently depicts Republican judicial nominees as “extremists.”America Coming Together: Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to coordinate and organize pro-Democrat voter-mobilization programs.America Votes: Soros also played a major role in creating this group, whose get-out-the-vote campaigns targeted likely Democratic voters. American Civil Liberties Union: This group opposes virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government. It supports open borders, has rushed to the defense of suspected terrorists and their abettors, and appointed former New Left terrorist Bernardine Dohrn to its Advisory Board.American Constitution Society for Law and Policy: This Washington, DC-based think tank seeks to move American jurisprudence to the left by recruiting, indoctrinating, and mobilizing young law students, helping them acquire positions of power. It also provides leftist Democrats with a bully pulpit from which to denounce their political adversaries.American Family Voices: This group creates and coordinates media campaigns charging Republicans with wrongdoing.American Friends Service Committee: This group views the United States as the principal cause of human suffering around the world. As such, it favors America’s unilateral disarmament, the dissolution of American borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, the abolition of the death penalty, and the repeal of the Patriot Act.American Immigration Law Foundation: This group supports amnesty for illegal aliens, on whose behalf it litigates against the U.S. government.American Library Association: This group has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s War on Terror — most particularly, Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, which it calls “a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users.”
The American Prospect, Inc.: This corporation trains and mentors young leftwing journalists, and organizes strategy meetings for leftist leaders.Amnesty International: This organization directs a grossly disproportionate share of its criticism for human rights violations at the United States and Israel.Arab American Institute Foundation: The Arab American Institute denounces the purportedly widespread civil liberties violations directed against Arab Americans in the post-9/11 period, and characterizes Israel as a brutal oppressor of the Palestinian people. Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now: This group conducts voter mobilization drives on behalf of leftist Democrats. These initiatives have been notoriously marred by fraud and corruption.Bill of Rights Defense Committee: This group provides a detailed blueprint for activists interested in getting their local towns, cities, and even college campuses to publicly declare their opposition to the Patriot Act, and to designate themselves “Civil Liberties Safe Zones.” The organization also came to the defense of self-described radical attorney Lynne Stewart, who was convicted in 2005 of providing material support for terrorism.Brennan Center for Justice: This think tank/legal activist group generates scholarly studies, mounts media campaigns, files amicus briefs, gives pro bono support to activists, and litigates test cases in pursuit of radical “change.”Brookings Institution: This organization has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including one that aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush’s tax cuts in 2003.Campaign for America’s Future: This group supports tax hikes, socialized medicine, and a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs.

Campus Progress: A project of the Soros-bankrolled Center for American Progress, this group seeks to “strengthen progressive voices on college and university campuses, counter the growing influence of right-wing groups on campus, and empower new generations of progressive leaders.”

Center for American Progress: This leftist think tank is headed by former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta, works closely with Hillary Clinton, and employs numerous former Clinton administration staffers. It is committed to “developing a long-term vision of a progressive America” and “providing a forum to generate new progressive ideas and policy proposals.”Center for Community Change: This group recruits and trains activists to spearhead leftist “political issue campaigns.” Promoting increased funding for social welfare programs by bringing “attention to major national issues related to poverty,” the Center bases its training programs on the techniques taught by the famed radical organizer Saul Alinsky.Center for Constitutional Rights: This pro-Castro organization is a core member of the open borders lobby, has opposed virtually all post-9/11 anti-terrorism measures by the U.S. government, and alleges that American injustice provokes acts of international terrorism.

Coalition for an International Criminal Court: This group seeks to subordinate American criminal-justice procedures to those of an international court.

Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund: Defenders of Wildlife opposes oil exploration in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It condemns logging, ranching, mining, and even the use of recreational motorized vehicles as activities that are destructive to the environment.

Democracy Alliance: This self-described “liberal organization” aims to raise $200 million to develop a funding clearinghouse for leftist groups. Soros is a major donor to this group.

Democracy 21: This group is a staunch supporter of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act.

Democratic Party: Soros’ funding activities are devoted largely to helping the Democratic Party solidify its power base. In a November 2003 interview, Soros stated that defeating President Bush in 2004 “is the central focus of my life” … “a matter of life and death.” He pledged to raise $75 million to defeat Bush, and personally donated nearly a third of that amount to anti-Bush organizations. “America under Bush,” he said, “is a danger to the world, and I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.” Claiming that “the Republican party has been captured by a bunch of extremists,” Soros accuses the Bush administration of following a “supremacist ideology” in whose rhetoric he claims to hear echoes of “Nazi slogans.”

Earthjustice: This group seeks to place severe restrictions on how U.S. land and waterways may be used. It opposes most mining and logging initiatives, commercial fishing businesses, and the use of motorized vehicles in undeveloped areas.

EMILY’s List: This political network raises money for Democratic female political candidates who support unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

Feminist Majority: Characterizing the United States as an inherently sexist nation, this group focuses on “advancing the legal, social and political equality of women with men, countering the backlash to women’s advancement, and recruiting and training young feminists to encourage future leadership for the feminist movement in the United States.”Free Press: This “media reform” organization has worked closely with many notable leftists and such organizations as Media Matters for America, Air America Radio, Global Exchange, Code Pink, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, the Revolutionary Communist Party, Mother Jones magazine, and Pacifica Radio.Funding Exchange: Dedicated to the concept of philanthropy as a vehicle for social change, this organization pairs leftist donors and foundations with likeminded groups and activists who are dedicated to bringing about their own version of “progressive” change and social justice. Many of these grantees assume that American society is rife with racism, discrimination, exploitation, and inequity and needs to be overhauled via sustained education, activism, and social agitation.

Gamaliel Foundation: Modeling its tactics on those of the radical Sixties activist Saul Alinsky, this group takes a strong stand against current homeland security measures and immigration restrictions.

Human Rights First: This group supports open borders and the rights of illegal aliens; charges that the Patriot Act severely erodes Americans’ civil liberties; has filed amicus curiae briefs on behalf of terror suspect Jose Padilla; and deplores the Guantanamo Bay detention facilities.

Human Rights Watch: This group directs a disproportionate share of its criticism at the United States and Israel. It opposes the death penalty in all cases, and supports open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.

Immigrant Legal Resource Center: This group claims to have helped gain amnesty for some three million illegal aliens in the U.S., and in the 1980s was part of the sanctuary movement which sought to grant asylum to refugees from the failed Communist states of Central America.

Independent Media Institute: This group provides leftist organizations with “strategic communications consulting, training, coaching, networking opportunities and concrete tools” to help them “achieve their social justice goals.”

Institute for Policy Studies: This think tank has long supported Communist and anti-American causes around the world. Viewing capitalism as a breeding ground for “unrestrained greed,” IPS seeks to provide a corrective to “unrestrained markets and individualism.” Professing an unquestioning faith in the righteousness of the United Nations, it aims to bring American foreign policy under UN control.

Institute for Women’s Policy Research: This group views the U.S. as a nation rife with discrimination against women, and publishes research to draw attention to this alleged state of affairs. It also advocates unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, stating that “access to abortion is essential to the economic well-being of women and girls.”

International Crisis Group: One of this organization’s leading figures is its Mideast Director, Robert Malley, who was a President Bill Clinton’s Special Assistant for Arab-Israeli Affairs. His analysis of the Mideast conflict is markedly pro-Palestinian.

Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: This group views America as an unremittingly racist nation; uses the courts to mandate race-based affirmative action preferences in business and academia; has filed briefs against the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to limit the wholesale granting of green cards and to identify potential terrorists; condemns the Patriot Act; and calls on Americans to “recognize the contribution” of illegal aliens.

League of United Latin American Citizens: This group views America as a nation plagued by “an alarming increase in xenophobia and anti-Hispanic sentiment”; favors racial preferences; supports the legalization of illegal Hispanic aliens; opposes military surveillance of U.S. borders; opposes making English America’s official language; favors open borders; and rejects anti-terrorism legislation like the Patriot Act.League of Women Voters Education Fund: The League supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; supports “motor-voter” registration, which allows anyone with a driver’s license to become a voter, regardless of citizenship status; and supports tax hikes and socialized medicine.Lynne Stewart Defense Committee: IRS records indicate that Soros’s Open Society Institute made a September 2002 grant of $20,000 to this organization. Stewart was the criminal-defense attorney who was later convicted for abetting her client, the “blind sheik” Omar Abdel Rahman, in terrorist activities connected with his Islamic Group.MADRE: This international women’s organization deems Americathe world’s foremost violator of human rights. As such, it seeks to “communicat[e] the real-life impact of U.S. policies on women and families confronting violence, poverty and repression around the world,” and to “demand alternatives to destructive U.S. policies.” It also advocates unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.Malcolm X Grassroots Movement: This group views the U.S. as a nation replete with racism and discrimination against blacks; seeks to establish an independent black nation in the southeastern United States; and demands reparations for slavery.Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition: This group calls for the expansion of civil rights and liberties for illegal aliens; laments that illegal aliens in America are commonly subjected to “worker exploitation”; supports tuition-assistance programs for illegal aliens attending college; and characterizes the Patriot Act as a “very troubling” assault on civil liberties.Media Fund: Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to conceptualize, produce, and place political ads on television, radio, print, and the Internet.Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund: This group advocates open borders, free college tuition for illegal aliens, lowered educational standards to accommodate Hispanics, and voting rights for criminals. In MALDEF’s view, supporters of making English the official language of the United States are “motivated by racism and anti-immigrant sentiments,” while advocates of sanctions against employers reliant on illegal labor seek to discriminate against “brown-skinned people.”Meyer, Suozzi, English and Klein, PC: This influential defender of Big Labor is headed by Democrat operative Harold Ickes.Midwest Academy: This entity trains radical activists in the tactics of direct action, targeting, confrontation, and intimidation.Migration Policy Institute: This group seeks to create “a North America with gradually disappearing border controls … with permanent migration remaining at moderate levels.”Military Families Speak Out: This group ascribes the U.S. invasion of Iraq to American imperialism and lust for oil.MoveOn.org: This Web-based organization supports Democratic political candidates through fundraising, advertising, and get-out-the-vote drives.Ms. Foundation for Women: This group laments what it views as the widespread and enduring flaws of American society: racism, sexism, homophobia, and the violation of civil rights and liberties. It focuses its philanthropy on groups that promote affirmative action for women, unfettered access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, amnesty for illegal aliens, and big government generally.NARAL Pro-Choice America: This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, and works to elect pro-abortion Democrats.NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund: The NAACP supports racial preferences in employment and education, as well as the racial gerrymandering of voting districts. Underpinning its support for race preferences is the fervent belief that white racism in the United States remains an intractable, largely undiminished, phenomenon.
The Nation Institute: This nonprofit entity sponsors leftist conferences, fellowships, awards for radical activists, and journalism internships.National Abortion Federation: This group opposes any restrictions on abortion at either the state or federal levels, and champions the introduction of unrestricted abortion into developing regions of the world.National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy: This group depicts the United States as a nation in need of dramatic structural change financed by philanthropic organizations. It overwhelmingly promotes grant-makers and grantees with leftist agendas, while criticizing their conservative counterparts.National Council for Research on Women: This group supports big government, high taxes, military spending cuts, increased social welfare spending, and the unrestricted right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.National Council of La Raza: This group lobbies for racial preferences, bilingual education, stricter hate-crime laws, mass immigration, and amnesty for illegal aliens.National Council of Women’s Organizations: This group views the United States as a nation rife with injustice against girls and women. It advocates high levels of spending for social welfare programs, and supports race and gender preferences for minorities and women in business and academia.National Immigration Forum: Opposing the enforcement of present immigration laws, this organization urges the American government to “legalize” en masse all illegal aliens currently in the United States who have no criminal records, and to dramatically increase the number of visas available for those wishing to migrate to the U.S. The Forum is particularly committed to opening the borders to unskilled, low-income workers, and immediately making them eligible for welfare and social service programs.National Immigration Law Center: This group seeks to win unrestricted access to government-funded social welfare programs for illegal aliens.National Lawyers Guild: This group promotes open borders; seeks to weaken America’s intelligence-gathering agencies; condemns the Patriot Act as an assault on civil liberties; rejects capitalism as an unviable economic system; has rushed to the defense of convicted terrorists and their abettors; and generally opposes all U.S. foreign policy positions, just as it did during the Cold War when it sided with the Soviets.National Organization for Women: This group advocates the unfettered right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; seeks to “eradicate racism, sexism and homophobia” from American society; attacks Christianity and traditional religious values; and supports gender-based preferences for women.National Priorities Project: This group supports government-mandated redistribution of wealth — through higher taxes and greater expenditures on social welfare programs. NPP exhorts the government to redirect a significant portion of its military funding toward public education, universal health insurance, environmentalist projects, and welfare programs.National Security Archive Fund: This group collects and publishes declassified documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act to a degree that compromises American national security and the safety of intelligence agents.National Women’s Law Center: This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; lobbies against conservative judicial appointees; advocates increased welfare spending to help low-income mothers; and favors higher taxes for the purpose of generating more funds for such government programs as Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, foster care, health care, child-support enforcement, and student loans.

Natural Resources Defense Council: One of the most influential environmentalist lobbying groups in the United States, the Council claims a membership of one million people.Pacifica Foundation: This entity owns and operates Pacifica Radio, awash from its birth with the socialist-Marxist rhetoric of class warfare and hatred for capitalism.

Peace and Security Funders Group: This is an association of more than 50 foundations that give money to leftist anti-war and environmentalist causes. Its members tend to depict America as the world’s chief source of international conflict, environmental destruction, and economic inequalities.People for the American Way: This group opposes the Patriot Act, anti-terrorism measures generally, and the allegedly growing influence of the “religious right.”Physicians for Human Rights: This group is selectively and disproportionately critical of the United States and Israel in its condemnations of human rights violations.Physicians for Social Responsibility: This is an anti-U.S.-military organization that also embraces the tenets of radical environmentalism.Planned Parenthood: This group is the largest abortion provider in the United States and advocates taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.Ploughshares Fund: This public grantmaking foundation opposes America’s development of a missile defense system, and contributes to many organizations that are highly critical of U.S. foreign policies and military ventures.Prison Moratorium Project: This initiative was created in 1995 for the express purpose of working for the elimination of all prisons in the United States and the release of all inmates. Reasoning from the premise that incarceration is never an appropriate means of dealing with crime, it deems American society’s inherent inequities the root of all criminal behavior.Project Vote: This is the voter-mobilization arm of the Soros-funded ACORN. A persistent pattern of lawlessness and corruption has followed ACORN/Project Vote activities over the years.

Proteus Fund: This foundation directs its philanthropy toward a number of radical leftwing organizations.

Public Citizen Foundation: Public Citizen seeks increased government intervention and litigation against corporations — a practice founded on the notion that American corporations, like the capitalist system of which they are a part, are inherently inclined toward corruption.Sentencing Project: Asserting that prison-sentencing patterns are racially discriminatory, this initiative advocates voting rights for felons.

Sojourners: This evangelical Christian ministry preaches radical leftwing politics. During the 1980s it championed Communist revolution in Central America and chastised U.S. policy-makers for their tendency “to assume the very worst about their Soviet counterparts.” More recently, Sojourners has taken up the cause of environmental activism, opposed welfare reform as a “mean-spirited Republican agenda,” and mounted a defense of affirmative action.

Tides Foundation and Tides Center: Tides is a major funder of the radical Left.Urban Institute: This research organization favors socialized medicine, expansion of the federal welfare bureaucracy, and tax hikes for higher income-earners. USAction Education Fund: USAction lists its priorities as: “fighting the right wing agenda”; “building grassroots political power”; winning “social, racial and economic justice for all”; supporting a system of taxpayer-funded socialized medicine; reversing “reckless tax cuts for millionaires and corporations” which shield the “wealthy” from paying their “fair share”; advocating for “pro-consumer and environmental regulation of corporate abuse”; “strengthening progressive voices on local, state and national issues”; and working to “register, educate and get out the vote … [to] help progressives get elected at all levels of government.”YWCA World Office, Switzerland: The YWCA opposes abstinence education; supports universal access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; and opposes school vouchers.
“Secondary“ or “Indirect“ Affiliates of the George Soros Network

By Discover The Networks

In addition to those organizations (“primary” or “direct” affiliates) that are funded directly by George Soros and his Open Society Institute (OSI), there are also numerous “secondary” or “indirect” affiliates of the Soros network. These include organizations which do not receive direct funding from Soros and OSI, but which are funded by one or more organizations that do. These secondary affiliates also include organizations that work collaboratively or synergistically with Soros-funded groups. Among these secondary affiliates are the following:Air America Radio: Funded by Democracy Alliance, which is heavily bankrolled by Soros, this radio station was created to advance the cause of the Democratic Party and the political Left. Catalist: Headed by Soros ally Harold Ickes, this political consultancy seeks “to help progressive organizations realize measurable increases in civic participation and electoral success by building and operating a robust national voter database of every voting-age American.” Toward this end, it helps leftist organizations conduct more effective get-out-the-vote drives and targeted political advertising.Center for Progressive Leadership: Funded by the Soros-bankrolled Democracy Alliance, this anti-capitalist organization is dedicated to training future leftist political leaders.J Street: Founded in April 2008, the Washington, DC-based J Street describes itself deceptively as “the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement.” Media Matters for America: Seeking to “systematically monitor [the media] for conservative misinformation” and to discredit anything that “forwards the conservative agenda,” this group, which has intimate ties to Hillary Clinton, works very closely with the Soros-backed Center for American Progress. It is heavily funded by Democracy Alliance, of which Soros is a major financier.Moving Ideas Network: This coalition of more than 250 leftwing activist groups is a partner organization of the Soros-backed Center for American Progress. Promoting the candidacy of leftwing politicians, the Moving Ideas Network was originally a project of the Soros-backed American Prospect and, as such, received indirect funding from the Open Society Institute. In early 2006, The American Prospect relinquished control of the Moving Ideas NetworkNew Organizing Institute: Created by the Soros-funded MoveOn.org, this group “trains young, technology-enabled political organizers to work for progressive campaigns and organizations.”Schumann Center for Media and Democracy: PBS broadcaster and Schumann Center President Bill Moyers is a trustee of the Open Society Institute’s Board of Directors. The Schumann Center shares many of OSI’s agendas.Service Employees International Union: The current President of SEIU is the former New Leftist Andrew Stern, who sat on the Executive Committee of the Soros-created America Coming Together.Sierra Club: This organization’s Executive Director, Carl Pope, co founded America Coming Together, in whose creation Soros played a major role.Think Progress: This “project” of the American Progress Action Fund, which is a “sister advocacy organization”of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress and Campus Progress, seeks to transform “progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communications, legislative action, grassroots organizing and advocacy, and partnerships with other progressive leaders throughout the country and the world.” Think Progress promotes an agenda identical to that of the left wing of the Democratic Party.Vote for Change: Coordinated by the political action committee of the Soros-funded MoveOn.org, Vote for Change was a group of 41 musicians and bands that performed concerts in several key election “battleground”states during October 2004, to raise money in support of Democrat John Kerry‘s presidential bid.Working Families Party: Created in 1998 to help push the Democratic Party toward the left, this front group for the Soros-funded ACORN functions as a political party that promotes ACORN-friendly candidates.
In a November 2008 interview with Spiegel, Soros made some comments that accurately outlined precisely the course that President Obama’s administration would eventually pursue in 2009:

“I think we need a large stimulus package which will provide funds for state and local government to maintain their budgets — because they are not allowed by the constitution to run a deficit. For such a program to be successful, the federal government would need to provide hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, another infrastructure program is necessary. In total, the cost would be in the 300 to 600 billion dollar range [in addition to the $700 billion bailout which the government already had given to the financial industry]…. I think this is a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence. The U.S. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights. I would use the revenues from these auctions to launch a new, environmentally friendly energy policy. That would be yet another federal program that could help us to overcome the current stagnation.”

The interviewer then said: “Your proposal would be dismissed on Wall Street as ‘big government.’ Republicans might call it European-style ‘socialism.'” Soros replied: “That is exactly what we need now. I am against market fundamentalism. I think this propaganda that government involvement is always bad has been very successful — but also very harmful to our society…. I think it is better to have a government that wants to provide good government than a government that doesn’t believe in government…. At times of recession, running a budget deficit is highly desirable. Once the economy begins to recover, you have to balance the budget. In 2010, the Bush tax cuts will expire and we should not extend them. But we will also need additional revenues.”
Apart from the more than $5 billion that Soros’ foundation network has donated to leftist groups like those listed above, Soros personally has made campaign contributions to such notable political candidates as Charles Rangel, Al Franken, Tom Udall, Joe Sestak, and Sherrod Brown.SOROS POLITICAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS: (a partial list) http://www.campaignmoney.com/biography/george_soros.asp

Political Campaign Contributions by George Soros (1999 to Present) – $3,411,576REPUBLICAN:0% DEMOCRAT:19%

Contributed To

Party

$ Amt

Date

FRANKEN RECOUNT FUND

Democrat Farm Labor

12,300

12/08/2008

DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF VIRGINIA

Democrat

10,000

12/05/2008

PERRIELLO FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

2,300

11/26/2008

RANGEL VICTORY FUND

Democrat

1,400

08/11/2008

POWERS FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

08/07/2008

ALASKANS FOR BEGICH

Democrat

2,000

08/06/2008

HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT

Democrat

2,300

07/31/2008

OBAMA VICTORY FUND

Democrat

2,300

07/31/2008

STEVE COHEN FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

07/22/2008

KEVIN POWELL FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

500

06/30/2008

PERRIELLO FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

06/30/2008

HAGAN SENATE COMMITTEE INC

Democrat

2,000

06/18/2008

HAGAN SENATE COMMITTEE INC

Democrat

2,000

06/18/2008

AL FRANKEN FOR SENATE

Democrat Farm Labor

2,000

06/03/2008

NEBRASKANS FOR KLEEB

Democrat

2,300

05/13/2008

NEBRASKANS FOR KLEEB

Democrat

4,600

05/13/2008

NEBRASKANS FOR KLEEB

Democrat

2,300

05/13/2008

NEBRASKANS FOR KLEEB

Democrat

4,600

05/13/2008

ACTBLUE

—

6,900

05/11/2008

FRIENDS OF DAN MAFFEI

Democrat

1,000

12/31/2007

BROWN FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

12/31/2007

JEFF MERKLEY FOR OREGON

Democrat

2,000

12/27/2007

JEANNE SHAHEEN FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,000

12/27/2007

UDALL FOR US ALL

Democrat

2,000

12/26/2007

UDALL FOR COLORADO

Democrat

2,000

12/26/2007

CAROL SHEA-PORTER FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

12/21/2007

PAUL HODES FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

12/21/2007

KILROY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

12/20/2007

FRIENDS OF SENATOR CARL LEVIN

Democrat

1,000

12/20/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

12/20/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

12/20/2007

ARCURI FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

12/19/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

12/19/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

12/19/2007

JOHN HALL FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

2,000

12/17/2007

DONNA EDWARDS FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,500

12/17/2007

DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

Democrat

21,750

06/30/2007

DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

21,750

06/29/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

21,750

06/29/2007

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

21,750

06/29/2007

PATRICK MURPHY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

06/28/2007

SESTAK FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

05/14/2007

TOM ALLEN FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,300

03/07/2007

OBAMA FOR AMERICA

Democrat

2,100

01/26/2007

AYDELOTT FOR CONGRESS, INC

Democrat

2,100

11/11/2006

KLEEB FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

2,100

11/06/2006

JOHN HALL FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,400

11/03/2006

FRIENDS OF DAN MAFFEI

Democrat

2,000

10/20/2006

CAMPAIGN MONEY WATCH

—

100,000

07/28/2006

FRIENDS OF TAMMY DUCKWORTH

Democrat

1,000

07/27/2006

SESTAK FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

07/27/2006

MAJORITY ACTION

—

120,000

07/21/2006

PATRICK MURPHY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

07/20/2006

DONNA EDWARDS FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

06/15/2006

NED LAMONT FOR SENATE

Democrat

1,000

06/10/2006

DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

Democrat

20,000

03/30/2006

AYDELOTT FOR CONGRESS, INC

Democrat

2,100

03/24/2006

AYDELOTT FOR CONGRESS, INC

Democrat

2,100

03/24/2006

DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

02/02/2006

FRIENDS OF SHERROD BROWN

Democrat

2,100

12/15/2005

CRANLEY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

2,100

12/12/2005

CRANLEY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

2,100

12/12/2005

CANTWELL 2012

Democrat

2,100

09/30/2005

CANTWELL 2012

Democrat

2,100

09/30/2005

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

20,466

09/30/2005

CANTWELL 2006

Democrat

2,100

09/30/2005

CANTWELL 2006

Democrat

2,100

09/30/2005

BOB CASEY FOR PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,100

09/29/2005

BOB CASEY FOR PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,100

09/29/2005

BOB CASEY FOR PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,100

09/29/2005

BOB CASEY FOR PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,100

09/29/2005

MCCASKILL FOR MISSOURI

Democrat

2,100

09/28/2005

MCCASKILL FOR MISSOURI

Democrat

2,100

09/28/2005

FRIENDS OF HILLARY

Democrat

1,250

09/22/2005

DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

20,466

09/19/2005

FRIENDS OF HILLARY

Democrat

2,100

09/16/2005

FRIENDS OF HILLARY

Democrat

2,100

09/16/2005

SALAZAR FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,000

10/30/2004

SALAZAR FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,000

10/30/2004

TONY KNOWLES FOR US SENATE

Democrat

2,000

10/09/2004

INEZ TENENBAUM FOR US SENATE

Democrat

2,000

09/30/2004

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

25,000

09/30/2004

SALAZAR FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,000

08/09/2004

HILL PAC

—

5,000

08/03/2004

BRAD CARSON FOR SENATE

Democrat

2,000

07/27/2004

OBAMA FOR ILLINOIS INC

Democrat

395

07/23/2004

DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

25,000

06/30/2004

PEOPLE FOR PATTY MURRAY U S SENATE CAMPAIGN

Democrat

1,000

06/28/2004

ERSKINE BOWLES FOR US SENATE

Democrat

2,000

06/04/2004

MAIN STREET INDIVIDUAL FUND

—

-50,000

04/29/2004

MOVEON.ORG VOTER FUND

—

1,044,285

03/09/2004

OBAMA FOR ILLINOIS INC

Democrat

12,000

02/27/2004

CALIFORNIA VICTORY 04

Democrat

2,000

02/26/2004

LEAHY FOR U.S. SENATOR COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,000

12/31/2003

LEAHY FOR U.S. SENATOR COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,000

12/31/2003

MOVEON.ORG VOTER FUND

—

955,714

12/30/2003

MOVEON.ORG VOTER FUND

—

500,000

11/01/2003

CLARK FOR PRESIDENT INC

Democrat

2,000

10/16/2003

A LOT OF PEOPLE SUPPORTING TOM DASCHLE INC

Democrat

1,500

09/25/2003

A LOT OF PEOPLE SUPPORTING TOM DASCHLE INC

Democrat

1,500

09/25/2003

FRIENDS OF HILLARY

Democrat

1,250

08/26/2003

TOM LANTOS FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Democrat

2,000

07/21/2003

BOB GRAHAM FOR PRESIDENT INC

Democrat

2,000

06/02/2003

MAIN STREET INDIVIDUAL FUND

—

50,000

04/22/2003

JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT INC.

Democrat

2,000

03/31/2003

DEAN FOR AMERICA

Democrat

1,000

03/24/2003

FRIENDS OF MARY LANDRIEU INC

Democrat

1,000

12/05/2002

FRIENDS OF SENATOR CARL LEVIN

Democrat

1,000

10/02/2002

BRADBURY FOR US SENATE

Democrat

1,000

09/30/2002

CITIZENS FOR HARKIN

Democrat

1,000

09/30/2002

PAC TO THE FUTURE

Democrat

5,000

09/13/2002

DCCCC NON-FEDERAL ACCOUNT #7

Democrat

50,000

09/10/2002

RON KIRK FOR U S SENATE

Democrat

1,000

09/09/2002

DSCC/NON-FED UNINCORP ASSOC

Democrat

3,000

09/06/2002

STRICKLAND FOR COLORADO INC

Democrat

1,000

09/05/2002

WELLSTONE FOR SENATE

Democrat

1,000

08/30/2002

TIM JOHNSON FOR SOUTH DAKOTA INC

Democrat

1,000

08/29/2002

SHAHEEN FOR SENATE COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

08/28/2002

CHELLIE PINGREE FOR US SENATE

Democrat

1,000

08/28/2002

JEAN CARNAHAN FOR MISSOURI COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

08/26/2002

DSCC/NON-FED UNINCORP ASSOC

Democrat

50,000

08/26/2002

A LOT OF PEOPLE SUPPORTING TOM DASCHLE INC

Democrat

500

07/23/2002

DEAN FOR AMERICA

Democrat

1,000

07/17/2002

GEPHARDT IN CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

07/14/2002

MARK PRYOR FOR US SENATE

Democrat

1,000

06/29/2002

KATRINA SWETT FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

06/17/2002

KATRINA SWETT FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Democrat

1,000

06/17/2002

ALEX SANDERS FOR THE US SENATE

Democrat

1,000

06/11/2002

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE – CONTRIBUTIONS

Democrat

15,000

12/31/2001

DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

10,000

12/31/2001

CITIZENS FOR BIDEN – 2002

Democrat

1,000

10/25/2001

FRIENDS OF SENATOR CARL LEVIN

Democrat

1,000

10/09/2001

DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE

Democrat

7,750

11/09/2000

ELAINE BLOOM FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

11/06/2000

CARNAHAN FOR SENATE COMMITTEE

Democrat

750

10/31/2000

CITIZENS TO ELECT RICK LARSEN

Democrat

750

10/20/2000

SUSAN DAVIS FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/19/2000

BILL NELSON FOR U S SENATE

Democrat

750

10/19/2000

STABENOW FOR US SENATE

Democrat

750

10/19/2000

TOM KEEFE FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/19/2000

CITIZENS FOR DANNER

Democrat

750

10/19/2000

O’SHAUGHNESSY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/18/2000

CONNELLY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/18/2000

VAN HORNE FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/18/2000

ELEANOR JORDAN FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/18/2000

LAUREN BETH GASH FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/18/2000

LINDA CHAPIN FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

750

10/11/2000

FRIENDS OF STEDEM

Democrat

750

10/11/2000

TIM JOHNSON FOR SOUTH DAKOTA INC

Democrat

1,000

10/10/2000

FRIENDS OF MIKE FORBES

Republican

250

07/19/2000

DCCCC NON-FEDERAL ACCOUNT #7

Democrat

100,000

06/06/2000

CRANLEY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

03/31/2000

CRANLEY FOR CONGRESS

Democrat

1,000

03/03/2000

DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE

Democrat

20,000

10/25/1999

CORZINE 2000 INC

Democrat

1,000

09/24/1999

CITIZENS FOR SARBANES

Democrat

1,000

07/14/1999

GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND

Democrat

1,000

06/30/1999

GORE 2000 INC

Democrat

1,000

06/30/1999

MCCAIN 2000 INC

Republican

1,000

06/02/1999

In addition to the campaign funding of McCain Above, The Soros Connection to Obama Runs Deeperhttp://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/25/meet-the-open-borders-family-mccain-hernandez-soros-and-the-reform-institute/ Meet the open borders family: McCain, Hernandez, Soros, and the “Reform Institute” By Michelle Malkin Follow the bouncing ball with me: Shamnesty peddler John McCain taps former Mexican government official/shamnesty advocate Juan Hernandez as his presidential campaign Hispanic Outreach Director. Hernandez is a fellow at McCain’s “Reform Institute.” What has he been working on there for the past year? “Dr. Juan Hernandez serves as a Senior Fellow of the Institute’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform Initiative.” That is: Shamnesty. Among the immigration projects at McCain’s Reform Institute: An art contest in which students depicted their protests against a southern border fence. The Reform Institute is a tax-exempt, supposedly independent 501(c)(3) group, as Ed Morrissey noted two years ago, “that employs Rick Davis, who also works on McCain’s staff as his chief political advisor, and they pay him $110,000 per year. The Reform Institute has often supported McCain, paid for events highlighting him and his agenda, presumably including campaign finance reform.” The Reform Institute received $200,000 in donations from Cablevision…and McCain basically tried to intervene on Cablevision’s behalf by writing a letter to the FCC supporting its regulatory agenda. Morrissey noted at the time: “[T]he Reform Institute helps keep McCain’s staff gainfully employed between campaigns, allowing McCain to do less fundraising while retaining the best of the available talent. For instance, Carl Hulse and Ann Kornblut note that Rick Davis managed McCain’s presidential campaign in 2000 before founding Reform Institute. Now its president, he gets over $100,000 a year from RI for “consulting services”. That money allows Davis to remain available for McCain’s future campaigns, and the funding he raises for RI gives him inroads for building support.” Yep. Which is exactly how it worked out. Davis is now McCain’s campaign manager. The IRS 990 form for the Reform Institute, filed in 2003, lists Davis and his “consulting fees:” Who funded the Reform Institute, which boasts Juan “Think Mexico First” Hernandez as its resident amnesty fellow? The donor list is a who’s who of ultra left-wing, open borders elites. Again, via Ed Morrissey’s research: * The Tides Foundation, which heavily promotes “reproductive justice”, giving over $500,000 to pro-abortion efforts. They also actively oppose the death penalty (so do I, FYI). John McCain opposes abortion and supports the death penalty, so why is his chief political advisor getting so much support from those who ostensibly oppose him? * Educational Foundation Of America, which also supports abortion. EFA also opposes drilling in ANWR, an issue on which McCain has an ambivalent record. It also supports euthanasia and assisted suicide through the Death With Dignity National Center, a group which it gave $45,000. It gave $100,000 to the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, which opposed the Yucca Mountain nuclear depository (McCain supported it), and opposes development of low-yield nuclear “bunker buster” bombs, which McCain supports. In fact, EFA appears to contribute to just about every left-wing cause imaginable, as well as a number of noncontriversial charities and outreach efforts. * The Proteus Fund, which also opposed the Yucca Mountain repository, spending $75K to stop it. That pales in comparison to the $935K they spent on supporting gay marriage initiatives, which McCain strongly opposes. They have also spent over $800,000 funding nuclear-disarmament and antiwar causes in each of the last two years. Their Security Policy Working Group contains nothing but left-of-center groups like Project on Defense Alternatives, which calls the Iraqi elections “faulty” and predicted disaster for the Bush administration’s “program of coercive transformation throughout the region.” * OSI (Open Society Institute), founded and funded by George Soros. Among a litany of left-wing causes supported by OSI are People For The American Way, to support their Supreme Court Project. (Hint: It isn’t intended on assisting Bush get his nominees confirmed.) They also gave $150,000 to the Campaign Legal Center, which will be important shortly. * David Geffen Foundation also shows up on the list, although not in the top tier. David Geffen is an entertainment-industry mogul who supports Democrats and left-wing causes. They do not have a website I could find, but Activistcash.com notes that in 2002, most of the grants Geffen gave went to environmental activists and the Tides Foundation and Tides Center. Via Discover the Networks, you’ll see that Soros’s OSI is a key open borders funder–providing support to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; the Immigrant Legal Resource Center; the National Immigration Law Center; the National Immigration Forum; the National Council of La Raza; and the American Immigration Law Foundation. Remind me again which party’s presidential nomination John McCain is running for?

GEORGE SOROS FOUDATIONS:Below are links to International Soros foundations, arranged alphabetically by country or area.

Good Democrats of America,

Your party has been co-opted by special interests and in particular, a billionaire who cares nothing for your country, your principles, your opinions. You need to take back your party, or as this may be impossible at this late date, you may need to start a new party of your own, reflective of your principles. Time is of the essence. Allow me to first introduce you to the actual head of your party. This will be an ongoing series. You don’t have to believe what I am saying, but please take time to investigate for yourself. I am confident the real Democrats of America do not condone corruption, anti-constitutional activities and laws or socialism.

George Soros was born on August 12, 1930 in Budapest, Hungary. His father, Teodoro Schwartz, was an Orthodox Jew who, in 1936, changed the family surname from Schwartz to Soros in order to enable his family to conceal its Jewish identity and thus to survive the Nazi Holocaust. In 1947 Soros’ family relocated from Hungary to England. Five years later, George graduated from the London School of Economics. He subsequently worked for a London stockbroker. In 1956 Soros, with meager personal assets, emigrated to the United States. To date, he has amassed a personal fortune exceeding $7 billion. In addition, his management company controls billions of dollars more in investor assets.

In 1979 Soros established the Open Society Institute (OSI), which serves as the flagship of a network of Soros foundations that donate tens of millions of dollars each year to a wide array of individuals and organizations that share the founder’s agendas. Those agendas can be summarized as follows:

*promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation
*promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States
*opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act
depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral
*promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws
*promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes
*promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens
defending the civil rights and liberties of suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters
*financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left
*advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending
*opposing the death penalty in all circumstances
*promoting socialized medicine in the United States
*promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”
*bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations
*promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike
*promoting taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand
*advocating stricter gun-control measures
*advocating the legalization of marijuana

Moreover, there are numerous “secondary” or “indirect” affiliates of the Soros network. These include organizations which do not receive direct funding from Soros and OSI, but which are funded by one or more organizations that do. These secondary affiliates also include groups that work collaboratively or synergistically with Soros-funded entities. In 1996 Soros launched the Soros Documentary Fund with a mission to “spur awareness, action and social change.” Over the ensuing decade, this Fund would help finance the production of several hundred documentaries. In 2001, the Fund’s leadership was turned over to Robert Redford’s Sundance Institute with a continuing mission: “to support the production of documentaries on social justice, human rights, civil liberties, and freedom of expression issues around the world.” According to journalist Rondi Adamson, most of the documentaries that that the Fund supports “are highly critical of some aspect of American life, capitalism or Western culture,” and generally share Soros’ worldview that “America is a troubling if not sinister influence in the world, that the War on Terror is a fraud and terrorists are misunderstood freedom fighters, and that markets are fundamentally unjust.

According to Richard Poe, co-author (with David Horowitz) of the book The Shadow Party:
“The Shadow Party is the real power driving the Democrat machine. It is a network of radicals dedicated to transforming our constitutional republic into a socialist hive. The leader of these radicals is … George Soros. He has essentially privatized the Democratic Party, bringing it under his personal control. The Shadow Party is the instrument through which he exerts that control…. It works by siphoning off hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions that would have gone to the Democratic Party in normal times, and putting those contributions at the personal disposal of Mr. Soros. He then uses that money to buy influence and loyalty where he sees fit. In 2003, Soros set up a network of privately-owned groups which acts as a shadow or mirror image of the Party. It performs all the functions we would normally expect the real Democratic Party to perform, such as shaping the Party platform, fielding candidates, running campaigns, and so forth. However, it performs these functions under the private supervision of Mr. Soros and his associates. The Shadow Party derives its power from its ability to raise huge sums of money. By controlling the Democrat purse strings, the Shadow Party can make or break any Democrat candidate by deciding whether or not to fund him. During the 2004 election cycle, the Shadow Party raised more than $300 million for Democrat candidates, prompting one of its operatives, MoveOn PAC director Eli Pariser, to declare, ‘Now it’s our party. We bought it, we own it.…'”

The so-called “Shadow Democratic Party,” or “Shadow Party,” is a nationwide network of more than five-dozen unions, non-profit activist groups, and think tanks whose agendas are ideologically to the left, which are engaged in campaigning for the Democrats. Its activities include fundraising, get-out-the-vote drives, political advertising, opposition research, and media manipulation. The Shadow Party was conceived and organized principally by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Harold McEwan Ickes — all identified with the Democratic Party left.

A political consultancy called the Thunder Road Group (TRG), located on the 7th Floor of the historic Motion Picture Association of America headquarters at 888 Sixteenth Street NW in Washington, DC, serves as the unofficial headquarters of the Shadow Party. Three other Shadow Party groups also lease space in the same building, including America Coming Together (ACT), America Votes, and the Partnership for America’s Families. The clustering of these groups in a building owned by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is significant. The MPAA has long enjoyed a close relationship with the Democratic Party; many high-ranking Democrats have transitioned comfortably from government jobs into glamorous posts in the MPAA’s upper management.

As of August 2004, the husband-wife team of George Soros and Susan Soros had contributed $13,120,000 to Shadow Party groups and operations, second only to Soros’ longtime friend and collaborator, insurance mogul Peter B. Lewis ($14,175,000). The third leading donor was Jane Fonda ($13,085,750), followed by Hollywood producer Stephen Bing in fourth place ($9,869,014). Other major funders of the Shadow Party include the Tides Foundation and the Open Society Institute (both Soros funded entities).

SOROS Has Successfully “TARGETED” Other Countries for “Regime Change”

Asserting that America needed “a regime change” to oust Bush, Soros declared that derailing the President’s reelection bid in 2004 “is the central focus of my life … a matter of life and death.” “America under Bush,” he said, “is a danger to the world, and I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.”

Soros had previously experienced considerable success in effecting “regime change” elsewhere in the world. For instance, he helped fund the 1989 “Velvet Revolution” that brought Vaclav Havel to power in the Czech Republic. And by his own admission, he helped engineer coups in Slovakia, Croatia, Georgia, and Yugoslavia.

When Soros targets a country for “regime change,” he begins by creating a shadow government — a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises. The Shadow Party he has built in America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries prior to instigating a coup.

Soros’ Vision is Reflected in Our Government Today:

In a November 2008 interview with Spiegel, Soros made some comments that accurately outlined precisely the course that President Obama’s administration would eventually pursue in 2009:

“I think we need a large stimulus package which will provide funds for state and local government to maintain their budgets — because they are not allowed by the constitution to run a deficit. For such a program to be successful, the federal government would need to provide hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, another infrastructure program is necessary. In total, the cost would be in the 300 to 600 billion dollar range [in addition to the $700 billion bailout which the government already had given to the financial industry]…. I think this is a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence. The U.S. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights. I would use the revenues from these auctions to launch a new, environmentally friendly energy policy. That would be yet another federal program that could help us to overcome the current stagnation.”
The interviewer then said: “Your proposal would be dismissed on Wall Street as ‘big government.’ Republicans might call it European-style ‘socialism.'” Soros replied:

“That is exactly what we need now. I am against market fundamentalism. I think this propaganda that government involvement is always bad has been very successful — but also very harmful to our society…. I think it is better to have a government that wants to provide good government than a government that doesn’t believe in government…. At times of recession, running a budget deficit is highly desirable. Once the economy begins to recover, you have to balance the budget. In 2010, the Bush tax cuts will expire and we should not extend them. But we will also need additional revenues.”

Soros Money Financed Communist Van Jones AIM Column By Cliff Kincaid

http://www.aim.org/ai…
When the list of donors to the Van Jones “Green for All” organization is examined, one name stands out-the Open Society Institute of billionaire George Soros. The Green for All 2008 annual report is also notable for the pictures of the powerful people who associated with Jones. They include House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Al Gore. While the Open Society Institute was supporting Green for All in 2008, when Jones was running it, the Soros-funded organization was financially underwriting the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights when Jones was in charge of that group. The Open Society Institute gave the Ella Baker Center $151,800 in 2006 and $140,000 in 2007. Jones ran this group during the years 1996-2007. He then emerged as a senior fellow at the Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Other funders of the Green for All group included Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, the Rockefeller family, Men’s Warehouse, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the New World Foundation, the Schwab Charitable Fund, the Streisand Foundation, the Service Employees International Union, and the Tides Center and Foundation. The 990 IRS forms of the Open Society Institute also disclose $560,000 in 2007 and $455,000 in 2006 to the Equal Justice Society, whose president, Eva Paterson, emerged as the major apologist for Jones when he came under attack for his communist background and anti-American statements.

Conservative Talk Radio- How Those at the FCC Want To Shut It Down- The Official Report – Does this sound Constitutional to You?http://www.americanpr…
From the Center for American Progress, the Soros Progressive Movement now in charge of our government, here is the report the new FCC head and FCC “Diversity” Czar are using to co-opt free speech in America. This is a 40 page pdf document co-authored by Mark Lloyd, the Diversity Czar, himself. Here is a peek:
“As this report will document in detail, conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format:

Our analysis in the spring of 2007 of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.

Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk—10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.

A separate analysis of all of the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets reveals that 76 percent of the programming in these markets is conservative and 24 percent is progressive, although programming is more balanced in markets such as New York and Chicago.

This dynamic is repeated over and over again no matter how the data is analyzed, whether one looks at the number of stations, number of hours, power of stations, or the number of programs. While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, conservative talk continues to be pushed out over the airwaves in greater multiples of hours than progressive talk is broadcast.

These empirical findings may not be surprising given general impressions about the format, but they are stark and raise serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans.

There are many potential explanations for why this gap exists. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand. As this report will detail, neither of these reasons adequately explains why conservative talk radio dominates the airwaves.

Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management.”

Let’s Take A Look At Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Officer (Czar), and Where He Stands On Issues by Desiree Paquette

Last Friday news broke which suggested a new agenda for the Federal Communications Commission, the government entitiy which issues licenses to broadcasters and broadcasting companies throughout the US. Under the Obama Administration, there is a new position at the FCC called the Diversity Officer. The Diversity Officer has the ability to put into place new regulations. Our new Diversity Czar has an agenda all his own, formulated over several years. This agenda entails creating a new license fee for private broadcast compaines, EQUAL TO THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET OF THAT COMPANY, then redistributing those fees to public broadcast stations to hire, in effect, minority talent and minority owned broadcast entities. There is not one entity who could survive paying their entire annual budget as a new tax, thus as the vast majority of privately owned broadcast entities promote and give voice to middle America, this overwhelming majority of the public would be left with NO VOICE and certainly NO DISSENTING VOICE for the policies and programs put forth by the minority far left segment of the population.

Let’s take a closer look at our new “Diversity Czar”, shall we?

Mark Lloyd has a very distinctive pedigree which cerrtainly fits the bill for a Diversity Czar. His history shows him to have started in broadcasting at NBC and CNN, then moving on to degrees from U of M and Georgetown University. According to his bio posted online at http://www.netcaucus.org/biography/mark-lloyd.shtml

Mark Lloyd is a senior fellow at the George Soros funded Center for American Progress focusing on communications policy issues, including universal service, advanced telecommunications deployment, media concentration and diversity. From the fall of 2002 until the summer of 2004, Mr. Lloyd was a Martin Luther King, Jr. visiting scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he taught communications policy and wrote and conducted research on the relationship between communications policy and strong democratic communities. He also served as the executive director of the Civil Rights Forum on Communications Policy, a non-profit, non-partisan project he co-founded in 1997 to bring civil rights principles and advocacy to the communications policy debate.

Let’s take a closer look at his past positions. According to Civil Rights.org The Civil Rights Forum on Communications Policy, it deals with.. The rules that govern the National Information Infrastructure concern and impact us all. Communications policy will determine whether all citizens will be able to participate effectively in the political process, have access to the public airwaves, share in the fruits of publicly-funded research, or maintain their privacy. Communications policy is a civil rights issue. The Civil Rights Forum works to bring civil rights organizations and community groups into the current debate over the future of our media environment. The Forum is a project of the Tides Center, a national non-profit organization which manages hundreds of projects that promote change toward a healthy society — one which is founded on principles of social justice, broadly shared economic opportunity and a robust democratic process. The twin goals of the Forum are to introduce civil rights principles and advocacy to the implementation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and to reframe the discussion over the role of media in our society around the needs of communities and the rights of citizens.

An article posted at zimbio.com at http://www.zimbio.com/The+Searched/articles/H7FW6nnt-NU/Mark+Lloyd+New+Chief+Diversity+FCC+Draws+Fire shows the newly appointed assoiciate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission, is having a rough time of it during his first days on the job. Lloyd has come under fire from some right-wing media sites, after two an article Lloyd authored in 2007 urging liberals to file complaints against conservative talk radio stations came to light.

In “Forget the Fairness Doctrine,” Lloyd writes that conservative radio stations have abonded the bottom line as their primary motivator, and are purely ideological organs. He argues, however, that ressurecting the Fairness Doctrine, which forced radio and television stations to give equal time to opposing viewpoints, is not the answer. He does, however, suggest the private radio broadcasters, due to the fact that they use public airwaves, should be required to donate and support public radio.

In 2009 Center for American Progress’s Progressive Media project emerged as a major communications war room on behalf of Obama’s domestic and foreign policy agenda and CAP became a strong advocate for escalation in Afghanistan. Progressive Media is run through the Center for American Project Action Fund, the more political 5014 arm of CAP. It coordindates closely with the Common Purpose Project, an effort to create message discipline among the pro-Obama organizations, with a direct tie to the White House. The Center for American Progress — which has emerged as perhaps Washington’s most influential idea factory in the age of Obama — is launching a major new war room, to be staffed by nearly a dozen people, that will focus on driving the White House’s message and agenda, I’m told. … The new war room – which is called Progressive Media – represents a serious ratcheting up of efforts to present a united liberal front in the coming policy wars. The goal of the war room will be to do hard-hitting research that boils down complex policy questions into usable talking points and narratives that play well in the media and build public support for the White House’s policy goals. … The war room – a joint project of CAP Action Fund and Media Matters Action Network — will be headed by well-known liberal operative Tara McGuinness, who worked on John Kerry’s presidential campaign and was a major player in the anti-war movement during the Bush years.” Jennifer Palmieri is the project’s communications director.

Mark Lloyd has served on the boards of directors of dozens of national and local organizations, including the Independent Television Service, OMB Watch, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. He has also served as a consultant to the Clinton White House, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Open Society Institute and the Smithsonian Institution. The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a 501(3) “non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting the democratic potential of today’s open, decentralized global Internet,” according to its website. CDT’s stated mission is “to conceptualize, develop, and implement public policies to preserve and enhance free expression, privacy, open access, and other democratic values in the new and increasingly integrated communications medium.” In 1994, Jonah Seiger “helped found and served as Communications Director for the Center for Democracy and Technology. “CDT pursues its mission through research and public policy development in a consensus-building process based on convening and operating broad-based working groups composed of public interest and commercial representatives of divergent views to explore solutions to critical policy issues. In addition, CDT promotes its own policy positions in the United States and globally through public policy advocacy, online grassroots organizing with the Internet user community and public education campaigns, and litigation, as well as through the development of technology standards and online information resources.”

At an article from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/10/pub-fccs-new-hire-previously-targeted-gop-radio-stations/ comes the following: The FCC’s new chief diversity officer laid out a battle plan two years ago for liberal activists to target conservative talk radio stations, and critics say they are concerned that he now will want to bring back the “Fairness Doctrine.” Mark Lloyd, who was named the associate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission last month, is under attack for authoring a June 2007 report entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” and a subsequent essay, “Forget the Fairness Doctrine”. “What he lays out is a battle plan to use the FCC to threaten stations’ licenses with whom they do not agree with politically, and now he’s at the FCC waiting to take their calls,” Motley told FOXNews.com. “This is not about serving the local interest, it’s about political opposition.” In February, a report in the American Spectator said aides to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., met with FCC staff to discuss ways to re-enact Fairness Doctrine policies and to apply them to the Internet as well. Both the FCC and Waxman’s office denied the report.

Our government is turning into a Chicago style scam. Please, look for yourself and become aware. They would have you believe it’s Democrat vs Republican. IT IS NOT! It’s much different than that. Most democrats would not endorse the coruption that is gripping our government. Neither would Independents, Libertarians, Republicans.

Free speech is turning into free speech only if it agrees with the Administration’s view point. The majority of the population is being dismissed. Opportunities for citizens to speak out are being filled instead with paid operatives (see help wanted ads in column from 08/14/2009), SEIU and ACORN members, while the authentic public is locked out and left standing in the street.

There is no substitute for knowledge. Your country is being taken away from you on a daily basis. It is important that you realize what is going on. If you condone it, do nothing. If you DON’T, please do what you are able to do. Pass along informative emails, attend a local tea party. If you can afford to do so, JOIN US 09/12 for the march on Washington. details at http://912dc.org/

Watchdog Tools

History Repeats Itself

"Their final objective toward which all their deciet is directed, is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection" - Henry A. Wallace, US VP 1941-45

Up until a few years ago, I was happy filling my life with personal issues of family, work, home. Then, I began to notice our once great country is run by a government which has no respect for the Constitution and no respect for us, it's citizens. I realize now it is up to folks like me to change this. I am only one person, but through this blog it is my hope to point out to ordinary Americans how our rights, our liberty, is being threatened. My belief is by shining a bright light, we as a people can begin to peacefully remove the power hungry, self serving autocrats running our government. This is not about one party or another. This is about the very foundation our country was built on. Our foundation is crumbling. Please help me shore it up! Do not be afraid to Speak Out Loudly! Of the people, by the people, for the people. That is how we will get our country back! Please visit our sister site www.WatchdogCentral.org to check up on your government officials - national, state and local.